April 09, 2004
calling all lawyers
When I took my retirement in a lump sum, I did it because of the tables I saw on the form the company sent me. They calculated my length of employment, my pay scale and the average life-span I was expected to live, and they offered me $1,036 dollars every month, based on the fact that I was expected to live 75 years.
I took it all in one bundle, because I believe in the "bird in the hand" theory. I doubt seriously that I'm going to live to the ripe old age of 75. I have too many bad habits.
But that lump sum will show up as "income" on my W-2 forms next year and the judge expects me to pay child support based solely on that one-time windfall, even though I no longer have a job. I have a question to ask:
Even though I took my retirement all in one bundle, shouldn't my child support be based on the same tables my company used? I'm not trying to avoid paying child support. I have paid child support for 2 1/2 years now and NEVER missed a payment. I am attempting to prevent the pure-assed looting of my retirement fund by a bloodless cunt of an ex-wife.
Charge me with 17% of $1,036 a month and I'll pay it until the day I die, then Quinton gets half of everything I own anyway. That way, I bleed, but I bleed slowly. Why does the law in Georgia want me thrown on an Aztec altar and my heart torn out all at once?
Do I have a case?
All content © Rob Smith