[Magdalen] your ongoing prayers, please

[Judy Fleener]

Praying for you, Marion.
Judy

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:19 PM, Sally Davies <sally.davies at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Oh, Marion, how frightful.  It sounds as though "our" lawyer might deserve
> reporting to professional standards (here it would be the Law Society).
> What he did there was unethical and unprofessional!!
>
> Prayers that justice will prevail.
>
>  I really don't think an agreement like that - at least here in South
> Africa - would be allowed by a court to supersede the normal protections of
> a marriage, be that an ante-nuptial contract or just the usual default
> which for us is accrual. Each party keeps the assets he or she brought into
> the marriage but value accrued thereafter is fairly divided as the parties
> agree.
>
> Mediation is a much, much better way to go but good faith is necessary for
> it to succeed.
>
> Sally D
>
> On Friday, 10 October 2014, Marion Thompson <marionwhitevale at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Much will also depend on the judge or whomever we present all this to.
> >
> > I've got my balance back and thank everyone for listening.  You have no
> > idea how helpful it has been to verbalize the mess.
> >
> > All will be well and all manner of thing will be well.    Back to writing
> > my sermon on thanksgiving!
> >
> > Marion, a pilgrim    ... today my sail I lift ....
> >
> > On 10/10/2014 1:17 PM, Heather Angus wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, Marion, this is even worse. I hope you have a good lawyer and a mean
> >> one!
> >>
> >> Heather
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Clarissa Canning <canplum at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>  prayer always
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Marion Thompson <
> >>> marionwhitevale at gmail.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Yes, current family law supports all that you have said and all that
> >>>> number crunching has been done.  The evil X factor in my situation is
> >>>> the
> >>>> agreement that was signed in Nov 1991.  We had been living together 10
> >>>> years, we both worked at  U of T (Jim as a full professor) .  Jim
> >>>> thought
> >>>> we'd have "a happier healthier life" in the country and we bought this
> >>>> house.  He put up the down payment and, as I understood it, I signed
> >>>> this
> >>>> agreement that he worked out with our lawyer friend to protect his
> >>>> stake
> >>>> in the house.  Fair enough.  Now, Our lawyer, not My lawyer, was a
> >>>>
> >>> trusted
> >>>
> >>>> good friend, Colonel of the Regiment and all that, and we were in his
> >>>> living room having a scotch while we did this business.  Verbal review
> >>>> of
> >>>> the contents.  Sign sign sign Have a drink.  Of course in the cold
> hard
> >>>> light of day farther down in the document what the agreement also says
> >>>> is
> >>>> that, should the relationship break down for any reason including
> death,
> >>>> neither party will pay or claim support from the other.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is the crux of the matter.  They claim this agreement is valid,
> we
> >>>> claim it is not for a whole whack of reasons.  If its validity is held
> >>>>
> >>> up,
> >>>
> >>>> too bad, so sad.  We have done horse-trading, but always with his
> >>>>
> >>> position
> >>>
> >>>> moving farther away from acceptable until now this.
> >>>>
> >>>> As a personal conundrum, to me there was a world of change in state
> >>>> between   knocking around and living together (never a pooling of
> >>>> resources) for a total of 20 years and moving into marriage.   I meant
> >>>>
> >>> what
> >>>
> >>>> I vowed.  In the ceremony how we all laughed at 'for richer for
> poorer'
> >>>>
> >>> and
> >>>
> >>>> 'with all my wordly goods I thee endow'. Hey-ho!
> >>>>
> >>>> Two lessons from this:  Take nothing for granted and read the fine
> >>>> print.
> >>>> And ALWAYS have your own lawyer to look out for your interests, even
> if
> >>>>
> >>> you
> >>>
> >>>> are certain your friends, however close or loved, are trustworthy.
> >>>> Maybe three:  Never be reluctant to talk.  Communicate!!! and insist
> >>>> that
> >>>> the other talk and communicate truthfully.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry, people,  if this is too much information.  Talk is my therapy.
> >>>>   Feel free to delete.
> >>>>
> >>>> Marion, a pilgrim
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 10/8/2014 7:34 PM, Molly Wolf wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>  In Ontario. You are entitled to half of the common assets, including
> >>>>>
> >>>> half
> >>>
> >>>> of the value of the matrimonial home, half his pension, and half of
> >>>>> anything he's salted away since your marriage.  He is entitled to
> half
> >>>>>
> >>>> of
> >>>
> >>>> your pension, etc.  Each of you lists what you've got, and then it's
> >>>>>
> >>>> horse
> >>>
> >>>> trading:  you get to keep the house, he gets to keep (some of) his
> >>>>>
> >>>> pension,
> >>>
> >>>> etc., until the property held in common (which means pretty much
> >>>>>
> >>>> everything
> >>>
> >>>> acquired since your marriage) ends up 50-50.  So don't fret.  He may
> >>>>> propose an unequal split, but you don't have to accept it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Have you got a separation agreement, or is this what you're
> >>>>> negotiating?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Molly
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn
> in
> >>>>>
> >>>> no
> >>>
> >>>> other way. -- Mark Twain
> >>>>>
> >>>>>   On Oct 8, 2014, at 3:14 PM, Marion Thompson <
> >>>>> marionwhitevale at gmail.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Time will tell!  We have maintained a very civil facade, never ever
> >>>>>> mentioning the legal stuff, but on Nov. 4 we both have to appear in
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> court
> >>>
> >>>> at some information session where we are told how everything works.  I
> >>>>>> guess the camel will truly be in the tent after that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Marion, a pilgrim
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  On 10/8/2014 12:16 PM, Cantor03--- via Magdalen wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In a message dated 10/8/2014 12:02:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> >>>>>>> mcepeda514 at gmail.com writes:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> divorce  when it is easy. My prayers......>>>
> >>>>>>>    Is it ever easy?
> >>>>>>>    I thought mine would be easy since it was simply deciding on
> >>>>>>> the details of a 50-50 split.  We were on fairly amicable  speaking
> >>>>>>> terms, and I thought we were out of the woods.
> >>>>>>>    Then my ex was referred by a mutual "friend" (actually the wife
> of
> >>>>>>> one of my fellow dermatology residents) to a person I later found
> >>>>>>> out defined the word,"misandry".  This "advisor" radicalized my
> >>>>>>> ex to the point that conversation was impossible, and it was
> through
> >>>>>>> lawyers (at $150 a crack) that even the simplest communication
> >>>>>>> occurred.
> >>>>>>>    I do hope things are better for you.
> >>>>>>>      David Strang - 30 years divorced and counting.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>  .
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >
>



-- 
Judy Fleener, ObJN
Western Michigan