Attorney called for information

[crayiii]

I am currently paying CS through an administrative order in WA.

I got a call from the attorney today and he wants me to send him a copy of my pay stub.  Neither my wife nor I have submitted any financial declarations in our dissolution that is still on-going.

I'm hesitant to send him any infomation at this time that I don't absolutely HAVE to.  He made it sound like he HAD to have the information in order for him to respond to my proposed parenting plan.  I asked if my wife would be submitting her financial declaration and he said no.

I asked about our 6/3 hearing and he said that he thinks we can come to agreement before then.  I asked what changes he was going to suggest and he said he would just send it all at once.

Should I send him my pay stub?

[socrateaser]

>Should I send him my pay stub?

(appropriate header info)

Dear Mr. ATTORNEYSNAME:

Per your request today, I am enclosing a copy of my most recent paystub, in order that you may prepare a proposed settlement agreement for my consideration.

On the same point, I have yet to receive a financial declaration from your client. Please consider this letter a formal request for discovery, that Ms. X provide a completed financial declaration, in the form required under Washington law, as well as a copy of her three most recent pay stubs, and a copy of her 2004 Federal and State tax returns, along with copies of any W2 forms filed with those returns.

Needless to say, it will be difficult for me to stipulate to any permanent support award without reasonably accurate knowledge of your client's current financial circumstances.

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me immediately.

Sincerely,
YOURNAME

----------------

Obviously, if you already have a copy of her tax return, because you filed jointly, then delete this part of the request.

[wendl]

Our case is in WA as well, it is pretty typical for both attorneys to request financial information, in our case BM requested my bank statements as well as my sons as she thought I was hiding money for my dh (we keep our finances seperate)

Do as SOC says and send the letter he did above, if you have an attorney then BMs attorney should not be contacting you and tell her she needs to contact your attorney.

**These are my opinions, they are not legal advice**

[Danae]

A thing of beauty! Absolute beauty!!!!!

[crayiii]

He received my 36 page set of interrogatories, request for production, and request for admissions on Friday.  Those cover my request for household finances.

It it I asked for all the financial information from her live in boyfriend.  In a declaration, he wrote that he has been financially supporting my wife and child since November so I believe his records are fair game for discovery.

[socrateaser]

>He received my 36 page set of interrogatories, request for
>production, and request for admissions on Friday.  Those cover
>my request for household finances.
>
>It it I asked for all the financial information from her live
>in boyfriend.  In a declaration, he wrote that he has been
>financially supporting my wife and child since November so I
>believe his records are fair game for discovery.

The records may well be, however, in order to lawfully obtain them, you will either have to convince the court to join the bf as a party for the purposes of facilitating discovery, or you will have to subpoena duces tecum the bf separately and have him bring his financial records to a deposition or to trial.

The above assumes that you also have a relevant legal theory for the production of the evidence you seek. If your purpose is to impute income to the custodial parent in order to reduce your child support obligation, then you don't need the bf's records, because only your spouse's "earning capacity" is relevant, i.e., the amount that your spouse is capable of earning in the prevailing employment market.

If your purpose is to show that your spouse has no requirement for spousal support under WA law, then this also may be relevant, however, the subject is fairly complex, WA statutes are somewhat open ended on the issue, and I don't have time to research the case law precedent at the moment.

[crayiii]

She has sold marital property (vehicle, etc.) and is saying that she has no bank account.  I am asking for financial records from all banks, etc. where she has either deposited funds or withdrew funds.

She also says she has no income yet she has to be depositing child support (from me and from her first ex) somewhere.

I asked specific questions such as (in the admissions portion) "Admit that your household financial standard of living is better now than it was during your marriage with NAME"

I got the list of interrogatories and request for productions from this book: http://www.seattle-divorce.com/book.html

Although it's for a different County, it seems pretty close.

[socrateaser]

>She has sold marital property (vehicle, etc.) and is saying
>that she has no bank account.  I am asking for financial
>records from all banks, etc. where she has either deposited
>funds or withdrew funds.

Vehicle title history can be obtained from the DMV.

>She also says she has no income yet she has to be depositing
>child support (from me and from her first ex) somewhere.

Child support is not "income" for the purpose of determining a party's standard of living, nor is it  taxable income to the recipient. And, your spouse doesn't have to be depositing the money somewhere -- she can simply have them cashed at a check cashing business. However, it's likely that she does have an account somewhere. If you want to find out where, have the children's grandparent send a small monetary gift to your spouse with a letter stating that they would like it to go to your son, and then see where your spouse deposits the check, by looking at the endorsement when your parents get it back.

You could also try to impeach her at trial by asking if she has any bank accounts and then if she says no, ask her to empty her purse in front of the court so that the court can see if she is carrying a debit card or checkbook.

>I asked specific questions such as (in the admissions portion)
>"Admit that your household financial standard of living is
>better now than it was during your marriage with NAME"

The easy answer to such a question is, "I don't know," and she really may not know, but regardless, unless her new standard of living is so obviously different from her old one, then you won't be able to prove her to be lying no matter how she answers.

>I got the list of interrogatories and request for productions
>from this book: http://www.seattle-divorce.com/book.html

Most jurisdictions have "form" interrogatories to obtain statistical info about the case. But, any question propounded that requires careful consideration will have a careful answer crafted by opposing counsel, that will provide you with generally useless evidence.

You seem to be rushing to bombard your spouse with legal process, rather than attempting to gain the few useful nuggets of info that will permit you to settle the case and move on with your life.

Your prior posts suggested to me that you had relatively few assets to distribute, and in as much as your wife is already living with a new partner, I'm betting that the judge will not award spousal maintenance in addition to child support. If this is all true, then you may be creating an unnecessarily adversarial case. You would be better off to concentrate on dispelling all of the charges being made that have a direct effect on your ability to obtain joint custody and substantial parenting time -- if you can achieve this, then the court will give the other issues greater weight in your favor.

Showing the evils of your spouse tends to make you appear vindictive and hostile. Better to simply show yourself in a good light, and not attempt to trash the other party.

And, none of the above demonstrates any credible reason to dig through your spouse's new partner's financials. The only credible reason for doing so, based upon the facts that you present, is the possibility that she has transferred marital assets of substantial value to her boyfriend for less than fair market value. But, again, in the past, you seem to have indicated that there were few valuable assets to transfer, so perhaps I'm confused.

[crayiii]

I guess it's an attempt at "social litigation".

My wife's attorney has been telling me at least two times a week that my wife is going to have our son call me.  Each time he talks to me, he acts like he is surprised that I haven't heard.  This has been going on for over a month.

He told me last week that I would be getting a settlement offer on Wed.  On Wed he told me Thur and and Thur he said Fri.  Never got anything.

When we spoke on Thursday, he tried telling me that if I didn't agree to what they proposed then they were going to go to the judge and ask for spousal support and call me up for a deposition.  He also said they were going to ask for all my financial records and contact my employer for information regarding 401k and bonuses.

I just feel that he is trying to push me around and, knowing he is going to have a hard time getting my wife to pay his fees, I want him to know that I'm not just going to roll over.

I will back off if that's the best thing for me to do though...

[socrateaser]

>I just feel that he is trying to push me around and, knowing
>he is going to have a hard time getting my wife to pay his
>fees, I want him to know that I'm not just going to roll
>over.
>
>I will back off if that's the best thing for me to do
>though...

You have a hearing soon enough. It will go something like this:

Your opponent will start telling the judge what a creep you are, and ask for all sorts of unreasonable stuff. The objective is to get you to think irrationally and say something stupid. Don't fall for the ploy. Just calmly say to the court:

"Your honor, I am here only to attempt to establish reasonable temporary orders that permit me joint legal custody, substantial parenting time, and appropriate child support for my son. My wife has establish an ex parte TRO based on frivolous allegations, and I would be happy to submit to a psychological evaluation, and/or a polygraph exam, in order to persuade the court that I am reasonably normal, and that I can be a positive influence in my son's life, as long as my spouse is willing to submit to the same examinations as to her own truthfulness and mental state.

As for the opposing counsel's suggestion that I pay spousal support, I think that under the circumstances, as Ms. X is apparently already living with a new dometic partner, and as she has apparently voluntarily chosen to not seek any employment, choosing instead to rely on her new partner for support, that any spousal support award should be denied at this time in order to encourage my spouse to seek suitable employment and become self-supporting, as soon as possible."

Your objective is to appear TOTALY rational and disinterested in any war of words over anything. This behavior will strongly indicate to the judge that you are NOT some basketcase that needs to be kept under control, and it will destroy your opponent's advantage, which, at the moment, is quite substantial.

If you show any sign of angst in the courtroom you will get creamed. If you attempt to argue the law, the judge will think you're a pompous windbag.

You need to go to the courthouse at least one day early and watch your judge in session, to see and hear how he/she operates. This will give you an opportunity to get comfortable in the unfamiliar environment, and you will learn very quickly what kind of hot buttons to avoid. If you sit there for more than an hour, the judge may even ask you what you're doing. If you're asked, then you just tell him that you have a hearing before the court on ??/??, and, that as you are representing yourself, you want to me at least comfortable enough in the courtroom so as to not make a complete fool of yourself.

The fact that you could sit through a day of court and not cause a scene will not be lost on the judge at your hearing -- especially, if opposing counsel or your spouse starts calling you all sorts of names. The judge will think, "This guy sat through eight hours of court and was perfectly quiet -- he's not the one who's nuts here."