Paying arrears from retirement account

[melissa3]

Dear Soc,

I live in Ma, ex lives in NH

Last week I had a hearing for contempt of child support. During the hearing I offered to pay the arrears from my retirement account but my ex's lawyer objected. The judge requested I fill out an updated financial statement and then sent us to probate for mediation (I believe that's what he meant.)

I filled out the new statement and when I searched for my ex's lawyer, a clerk informed me that the lawyer told the judge I had left the court house and a Capias was issued against me. Note: I never left the court house.

I tele-conferenced the lawyer, faxed him my account balance and told him I'd have to withdrawal to pay the arrears. He then told me he wanted me to pay the court fees and his legal fees as well. He's scheduling another contempt hearing in 2 weeks.

Note: Withdrawing from the account myself would result in fees and penalties. A court order, however, sidesteps all that.

I would rather not pay my ex's legal fees again. Also, my ex and her lawyer have me by the onions and I'm tired of it.

Questions:

1. Aside from going back to court on another contempt hearing in 2 weeks, is there something I can file now to get an order to withdraw for just the amount for the arrears I owe?

Thank you

[socrateaser]

>Questions:
>
>1. Aside from going back to court on another contempt hearing
>in 2 weeks, is there something I can file now to get an order
>to withdraw for just the amount for the arrears I owe?

A state court order does not eliminate federal tax penalties on an ERISA-qualified retirement account. But, maybe you're talking about some other sort of penality.

Re the contempt, if you were found in contempt, then you'll be taxed with the other party's legal fees, because but for your contempt, your ex would not have incurred the legal expenses.

I have no suggestions that can defeat this circumstance.

[melissa3]

"Re the contempt, if you were found in contempt, then you'll be taxed with the other party's legal fees, because but for your contempt, your ex would not have incurred the legal expenses."

I am trying to avoid being found in contempt by paying the arrears before the next hearing. Assuming my ex's lawyer will charge me for both hearings, it seems it would just be cheaper to withdraw myself.

Question:
1. If I eliminate my arrears now, there won't be need for a future hearing?

Thank you.

[socrateaser]

>Question:
>1. If I eliminate my arrears now, there won't be need for a
>future hearing?

The finding of contempt is based on the charge. Presumably, it's something like: "On ??/??/??, respondent was ordered to pay $X, and he didn't pay. Therefore, respondent should be found in contempt."

The fact that you pay, after the date on which you owed the money does not eliminate the possibility of being found in contempt for not paying when the support was originally due.

Now, you can argue that the contempt hearing is moot, because there is no longer any injury to the petitioner. But, the counter is that you've cost the petitioner money by having to go to court, so she is still injured.

So, there may still be a need for a future hearing, if only to determine attorney fees.

I recommend that you offer to pay one half and see if it flies.

[melissa3]

Dear Soc,

I live in Ma, ex lives in NH

Last week I had a hearing for contempt of child support. During the hearing I offered to pay the arrears from my retirement account but my ex's lawyer objected. The judge requested I fill out an updated financial statement and then sent us to probate for mediation (I believe that's what he meant.)

I filled out the new statement and when I searched for my ex's lawyer, a clerk informed me that the lawyer told the judge I had left the court house and a Capias was issued against me. Note: I never left the court house.

I tele-conferenced the lawyer, faxed him my account balance and told him I'd have to withdrawal to pay the arrears. He then told me he wanted me to pay the court fees and his legal fees as well. He's scheduling another contempt hearing in 2 weeks.

Note: Withdrawing from the account myself would result in fees and penalties. A court order, however, sidesteps all that.

I would rather not pay my ex's legal fees again. Also, my ex and her lawyer have me by the onions and I'm tired of it.

Questions:

1. Aside from going back to court on another contempt hearing in 2 weeks, is there something I can file now to get an order to withdraw for just the amount for the arrears I owe?

Thank you

[socrateaser]

>Questions:
>
>1. Aside from going back to court on another contempt hearing
>in 2 weeks, is there something I can file now to get an order
>to withdraw for just the amount for the arrears I owe?

A state court order does not eliminate federal tax penalties on an ERISA-qualified retirement account. But, maybe you're talking about some other sort of penality.

Re the contempt, if you were found in contempt, then you'll be taxed with the other party's legal fees, because but for your contempt, your ex would not have incurred the legal expenses.

I have no suggestions that can defeat this circumstance.

[melissa3]

"Re the contempt, if you were found in contempt, then you'll be taxed with the other party's legal fees, because but for your contempt, your ex would not have incurred the legal expenses."

I am trying to avoid being found in contempt by paying the arrears before the next hearing. Assuming my ex's lawyer will charge me for both hearings, it seems it would just be cheaper to withdraw myself.

Question:
1. If I eliminate my arrears now, there won't be need for a future hearing?

Thank you.

[socrateaser]

>Question:
>1. If I eliminate my arrears now, there won't be need for a
>future hearing?

The finding of contempt is based on the charge. Presumably, it's something like: "On ??/??/??, respondent was ordered to pay $X, and he didn't pay. Therefore, respondent should be found in contempt."

The fact that you pay, after the date on which you owed the money does not eliminate the possibility of being found in contempt for not paying when the support was originally due.

Now, you can argue that the contempt hearing is moot, because there is no longer any injury to the petitioner. But, the counter is that you've cost the petitioner money by having to go to court, so she is still injured.

So, there may still be a need for a future hearing, if only to determine attorney fees.

I recommend that you offer to pay one half and see if it flies.