Welcome to SPARC Forums. Please login or sign up.

Nov 12, 2024, 04:59:51 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Private School costs

Started by forthekids24, Jul 24, 2006, 11:05:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

forthekids24

Oct 2003 stipulation states that parents shall split the cost of private school 50/50 with Mom reimbursing Dad for those costs.

Mom filed OSC in Aug 2005 to reduce her share of the for private school costs to zero.

Judge ordered that based on Mom's new salary Mom would responsible for "32% of the private school costs for the 2005-2006 school year only"

Questions:

1) Is Mom still responsible for a % of the school costs?

2) If yes, is she responsible for 50% or 32%?

Thanks!
FTK

socrateaser

>Questions:
>
>1) Is Mom still responsible for a % of the school costs?

I don't know. The order could be interpreted a bunch of different ways: (1) 2006 school year mom's not responsible for any costs; (2) 2006 school year mom's responsible for 50% again; (3) the order covers both the 2005 and 2006 school years, so #1, and #2 change 2006 to 2007.

You need to have the order clarified. I don't know what the hell it means.

I do know this. When parties agree to negotiate a property issue, like sharing private school costs (assuming the child doesn't have special needs that only a private school can accomodate), the court cannot modify the parties agreement. This means that the court overstepped its authority by making this modification of your stipulated order.

Nevertheless, by not appealing the order, it has become valid and enforceable, so you have no recourse now.

But, in the future, if the judge orders something like this, you may be able to stop it, if you feel like spending the monehy for an appeal.

Hazel

"I do know this. When parties agree to negotiate a property issue, like sharing private school costs (assuming the child doesn't have special needs that only a private school can accomodate), the court cannot modify the parties agreement. This means that the court overstepped its authority by making this modification of your stipulated order."

Is this true of any stipulated order?  (Other than CS or Maint?) i.e.  College Expenses?

socrateaser

>"I do know this. When parties agree to negotiate a property
>issue, like sharing private school costs (assuming the child
>doesn't have special needs that only a private school can
>accomodate), the court cannot modify the parties agreement.
>This means that the court overstepped its authority by making
>this modification of your stipulated order."
>
>Is this true of any stipulated order?  (Other than CS or
>Maint?) i.e.  College Expenses?

Yes.