I have been paying child support for 11 years. My Separation Agreement states that I will pay child support until each child turns 21. My oldest daughter just turned 21 (my youngest is 17). I went to Family Court after her birthday to get my support decreased thinking it was just a formality. At court I discovered that my separation agreement didn't spell out that child support was "allocated" per child. Thus, my ex-wife's lawyer is arguing it as "unallocated" meaning my child support amount would not decrease and I would have to pay the full amount until my youngest daughter turns 21. When the agreement was drawn up my lawyer and her lawyer came up with the support amount based on 17% for the first child and 8% for the second (but it was not written in the agreement like this). This was how it was explained to us. Attached PDF file is the child support section from my Separation Agreement. My ex-wife was under the same assumption that her support was going to be decreased because she complained to me about having to go to court a few weeks ago "for just a formality". Her court appointed lawyer came upon this technicality and she's excited about this extra windfall she wasn't planning on.
My present lawyer said her research on this matter isn't too encouraging for me. Because my old lawyer did not use the word "allocated" in my agreement, I could get stuck paying thousands of extra dollars for the next 4 years which is not morally right. Can anyone provide some case law or arguments that I can use to have this not happen? We go back to court in a few weeks.
My present lawyer said her research on this matter isn't too encouraging for me. Because my old lawyer did not use the word "allocated" in my agreement, I could get stuck paying thousands of extra dollars for the next 4 years which is not morally right. Can anyone provide some case law or arguments that I can use to have this not happen? We go back to court in a few weeks.
