The precedent is chilling and is, in my opinion, where this case becomes an abomination, but the particulars of this case end up "okay" for the defendant. Hear me out.
He'll pay $4,362 per month until the middle child is 18 (currently 15), and a smaller sum until the youngest is 18 (12 years old at the moment). He'll also have to pay ~$130,000 in child support retroactively for the 7 years the couple was together in what the judge determined was a "marriage-like relationship."
However... a marriage-like relationship means the man is entitled to half of the $1.5 million property the woman purchased and intended to keep for herself, so that's cool.
I don't know about you, but $4,000 a month drain from my paycheck is not "okay", and half of a property that I will need yet another lawyer to get any value out of does not make up for it.
The precedent is chilling and is, in my opinion, where this case becomes an abomination, but the particulars of this case end up "okay" for the defendant. Hear me out.
He'll pay $4,362 per month until the middle child is 18 (currently 15), and a smaller sum until the youngest is 18 (12 years old at the moment). He'll also have to pay ~$130,000 in child support retroactively for the 7 years the couple was together in what the judge determined was a "marriage-like relationship."
However... a marriage-like relationship means the man is entitled to half of the $1.5 million property the woman purchased and intended to keep for herself, so that's cool.
I don't know about you, but $4,000 a month drain from my paycheck is not "okay", and half of a property that I will need yet another lawyer to get any value out of does not make up for it.
Totally, man. I just meant he gets something out of it, not that it's actually okay. Like I said, the precedent is an abomination.