...and Moonbeam... let's not be foolish. If it were so easy to determine what a 50/50 split was in a divorce, there would be a lot of lawyers with no business.
It ISN'T easy to determine what 50/50 is, that's why we have lawyers. California, however, has strict guidelines on what it considers 'equitable distribution of the assests'.
...
... and i just puked a little when i read that you think the less wealthy spouse is "entitled" to live the lifestyle they're accustomed to. Child support: yes, Alimony: to an extent, but no one is entitled to ANYTHING that they didn't contribute anything to!
Unfortunately, like it or not, agree with it or not, the standard of living
IS a factor in figuring out spousal support...which is why divorces, particularly in California get so nasty...
4320. In ordering spousal support under this part, the court shall consider all of the following circumstances:
(a) The extent to which the earning capacity of each party is sufficient to maintain the
standard of living established during the marriage, taking into account all of the following:
(1) The marketable skills of the supported party; the job market for those skills; the time and expenses required for the supported party to acquire the appropriate education or training to develop those skills; and the possible need for retraining or education to acquire other, more marketable skills or employment.
(2) The extent to which the supported party's present or future earning capacity is impaired by periods of unemployment that were incurred during the marriage to permit the supported party to devote
time to domestic duties.
(b) The extent to which the supported party contributed to the attainment of an education, training, a career position, or a license by the supporting party.
(c) The ability of the supporting party to pay spousal support, taking into account the supporting party's earning capacity, earned and unearned income, assets, and standard of living.
(d)
The needs of each party based on the standard of living established during the marriage.
(e) The obligations and assets, including the separate property, of each party.
(f) The duration of the marriage.
(g) The ability of the supported party to engage in gainful employment without unduly interfering with the interests of dependent children in the custody of the party.
(h) The age and health of the parties.
(i) Documented evidence of any history of domestic violence, as defined in Section 6211, between the parties, including, but not limited to, consideration of emotional distress resulting from domestic violence perpetrated against the supported party by the supporting party, and consideration of any history of violence against the supporting party by the supported party.
(j) The immediate and specific tax consequences to each party.
(k) The balance of the hardships to each party.
(l) The goal that the supported party shall be self-supporting within a reasonable period of time. Except in the case of a marriage of long duration as described in Section 4336, a "reasonable period of time" for purposes of this section generally shall be
one-half the length of the marriage. However, nothing in this section is intended to limit the court's discretion to order support for a greater or lesser length of time, based on any of the other factors listed in this section, Section 4336, and the circumstances of the parties.
(m) The criminal conviction of an abusive spouse shall be considered in making a reduction or elimination of a spousal support award in accordance with Section 4325.
Any other factors the court determines are just and equitable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Article California Spousal Support was written by Aaron Dishon; Copyright Dishon & Block, APC.
P.S.:
you assume that the less rich spouse is a "she", that's not the California/P.C. way to think of it!
Well, I did *assume* the poster was male since he basically said 'what if my wife wants take everything I have...'
Sorry this was SO long...
