Our story

[kolja]

Well, the ABOVE question from earlier this evening is on the back burner again. True to schedule, tonight there was a text message discussion (argument?) about the divorce and spousal maintenance.

She asked if I was ready to settle, or if she needed a lawyer.

I said I couldn't stop her, and asked if she was still expecting $1000/mo for a year. She said yes, and I asked for another couple days to think about it (mainly so I could talk to Chuck and get some professional advice on how to handle the topic of discussion without making things worse). She said "Really??? Haven't I given you plenty of time??? I just want to get filed and move on..." I said I didn't understand why she was in such a hurry (that might be the one most 'NON-divorce busting' line I used - I was totally stalling). She replied it was was because she had been over this for a while and just wanted to be happy again, just wanted to be able to move on.

Here's where it got kind of interesting. Since her demands were so out of whack with what my self-protective legal consultation revealed to me, I asked her if she had even called a lawyer for advice on this, and said I was curious as to how we had such different expectations of how things would go.

She said she had, and that she thought she could get a hell of a lot more including the houses and investments. Which tells me either she DIDN'T talk to an attorney and is trying to bluff/intimidate me into giving her a 'golden parachute' out of the marriage, she misunderstood what the attorney said, the attorney she spoke to is incompetent, or the attorney she talked to is unethical and told her something completely incorrect to get her business or whatever. I looked up our state's laws on avvo.com, and they match what the attorney I talked to told me.

I told her that the attorney I had spoke to had told me something completely different - it was the first time I had mentioned talking to an attorney, but felt given the way things were going it wouldn't be a bad thing to mention. She predictably blew up, and said "you [expletive] disgust me" - I said I just got initial advice to make sure I understood things, and that I had a right to protect myself. She said "so do I, and you don't seem to understand things very well."

I asked if her attorney knew we had only been married 17 months now and that both houses had been acquired by me before the marriage. She said "yep... it's a community state."

Pause here if you need to let that one sink in, or do a double take. At this point I was glad we were texting (even if that meant she couldn't tell my calm demeanor in all this) because in person I'm pretty sure when she said that, I looked Keeanu Reeves in "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" or Spicoli from "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" with a stoner-worthy "huh????" face.

She then opined that it's been 17 months too long too - bait I refused to take (which, at the risk of tooting my own horn, I'm pretty proud of).

I sent her a link to the avvo.com page (a debatable move I guess - but at the same time, I think she needed to know I wasn't going to be taken advantage of and that this wasn't going to be the easy way out she seems to think it is) and reminded her that the houses and most of the investment assets are separate property. Then, since I had just got home from the gym (it's a short drive and no I wasn't texting and driving!!), I said I had to hit the shower and make dinner. She said "Whatever, I'm done with you."

So... I think gunny clearly hit the nail on the head last week or so when he said it sounds like she's frustrated.