a Judge Orders You To Pay Spouse's Divorce
Legal Fees - DON'T
is a normal debt that you did not contract
and for practical purposes it is not
collectible! There is no statute to
support on paying another's legal fees
about discharging attorney's fees and
child support in bankruptcy)
Do not fund your
enemy's army. Do not ever pay these
ordered amounts. It is a civil debt
and they can go through normal collection
processes. Even if you are held in
contempt, which should not happen,
you can not be jailed for this type
of debt, like you can before child
support due to this being treated
differently than a civil debt by law.
Divorce is the #3
reason for bankruptcy due to the insane
orders of courts that look only at
the mothers financial to make determinations
and often leave fathers unable to
support themselves. With 40% of take-home
pay (average with 2 children) going
to the wife TAX FREE a man earning
$50,000 per year takes home $357/month.
Not even enough to rent an apartment,
never mind a car, food and other living
Normal civil debt
requires a "meeting of the minds",
contract or agreement. None exists
so collection is VERY difficult.
PAY YOUR SPOUSE'S LEGAL BILLS!
Every war is a war of attrition and
funding your enemy is just plain stupid!!
You will be amazed at how quickly things
move along, or how quick the spouse's
when they realize they will never collect
from you. :)
Lawyers are mercenaries! No cash no
person pays his own attorney fees.
k. American Rule; Necessity of Contractual
or Statutory Authorization
or Grounds in Equity.
Most Cited Cases
As a general
rule, a litigant must bear his own
expenses including attorney fees,
except where a statute permits the
award of costs, a valid contract or
stipulation provides for costs, or
rules concerning damages permit recovery.
528, 707 N.E.2d 839
2. Attorney's fees. Aurora urges that
the award of attorney's fees by the
second judge in the amount of $2,000
must be vacated as there is no statutory
basis for the award and no contractual
provision for fees in the parties'
"As a general rule in Massachusetts,
a litigant must bear his own expenses
including attorney's fees, except
where a statute permits the award
of costs, a valid contract [or] stipulation
provides for costs, or rules concerning
damages permit[ ] recovery."
Judge Rotenberg Educ. Center, Inc.
v. Commissioner of Dept. of Mental
Retardation (No. 1), 424 Mass. 430,
Krock v. Krock, 46 Mass.App.Ct. 528,
531 n. 2 (1999). See
Police Commr. of Boston v.
Gows, 429 Mass. 14, 17 (1999)
("Massachusetts generally follows
the 'American Rule' and denies recovery
of attorney's fees absent a contract
or statute to the contrary.")
Additional exceptions to the general
rule have been created, where, for
example, an insured under a homeowner's
policy has successfully established
an insurer's duty to defend,
Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. v.. Gamache,
426 Mass. 93, 95-97 (1997),
or a party has been forced to litigate
to obtain what previously had been
awarded by a court even though the
opposing party's conduct did not constitute
Police Commr. of Boston v. Gows, 429
Mass. at 17-19. See the
case summaries in
Krock v. Krock, 46 Mass.App.Ct. at
531-532 n 2.
v. Beato 60 Mass.App.Ct. 110
60 Mass.App.Ct. 1102, 798 N.E.2d 1045
(Table), 2003 WL 22724007 (Mass.App.Ct.)
following case is the biggie which
most lawyers cite on appeals to demand
ELIZABETH CASTRO & ANOTHER
N.E.2d 342, 406 Mass. 17
relevant section is
recognized the explicit language
of G. L. c. 186, § 14, which
provides for payment of attorney's
fees, and this language is not
limited to attorney's fees for
trial proceedings. See Darmetko
v. Boston Hous. Auth., 378 Mass.
758, 765 (1979). Similarly,
we approved the award of attorney's
fees under G. L. c. 186, § 18,
where the statutory language
is equally clear and not limited
to attorney's fees for trial
proceedings. See Ianello v.
Court Management Corp., 400
Mass. 321, 325 (1987). The language
of G. L. c. 93A, § 9 (4), leaves
no doubt as to the right to
recover attorney's fees without
any suggestion that fees for
the appeal are excluded. See
Kohl v. Silver Lake Motors,
Inc., 369 Mass. 795, 801 (1976).
The statutory provisions for
a "reasonable attorney's
fee" would ring hollow
if it did not necessarily include
a fee for the appeal. The right
to appellate attorney's fees
under these statutes is beyond
for the award of attorney's
fees for appellate work. A more
difficult question is whether
the rule which we announced
in Mellor v. Berman, 390 Mass.
275, 284 (1983), to the effect
that "either appellate
costs nor attorney's fees for
the appeal can be imposed by
a trial court absent authorization
by an appellate court or by
virtue of a rule or statute,"
applies to attorney's fees for
appellate work under the statutes
in the present case. We have
treated as discretionary in
the appellate court the award
of attorney's fees on appeal
where a statute provides for
the payment of reasonable attorney's
fees. Patry v. Liberty Mobilehome
Sales, Inc., 394 Mass. 270,
272 (1985). Although, in Mellor,
the court was deciding the issue
under G. L. c. 186, § 15B, a
statute which does not figure
in the present case, the rule
has been extended to the award
of appellate attorney's fees
under the statutes in the present
case. See Patry v. Liberty Mobilehome
Sales, Inc., supra.
||We are asked to abandon the
Mellor rule in favor of a practice
which would permit a trial Judge
to award attorney's fees for appellate
services without any authorization
from an appellate court. Despite
the force and diversity of the
arguments for abandonment of the
Mellor rule, we conclude that
the rule is sound.
||An appellate court is in a far
better position to evaluate the
worth of the appellate work than
the trial Judge. The Justice of
the appellate court who writes
the opinion for the court develops
nothing short of an intimacy with
the record on appeal and the briefs.
An appellate Justice on the quorum
or panel which hears and decides
the appeal develops a knowledge
of the case and the value of the
work of the attorney who seeks
compensation. A trial Judge simply
cannot bring to bear this familiarity
with the appellate work.
||3. The procedure under Mellor
v. Berman. If Mellor has left
the bar unclear as to the procedural
requirements of an award of legal
fees for appellate work, we set
||A party who seeks an award of
appellate attorney's fees should
request them in his brief. If
such party does not prevail, he
is not entitled to fees, though
no harm accrues from the request.
If such party prevails, he may
then submit his petition for fees
together with the necessary back-up
material and details as to hours
spent, precise nature of the work,
and fees requested. The other
party should be given a reasonable
time to respond. The appellate
Justice who considers the petition
may request more data and may
set down the matter for hearing
with notice to the other party.
This procedure places no greater
burden on the parties than the
procedure requested before the
||Judgment of the Superior Court
fathers who have been through this:
order so you might want to read from
the probate judges do and what is
legal are almost certainly two different
things. They will intimidate you to
do their will without regard for the
real law, knowing the 95% of people
will not understand it is illegal
or appeal. I was found in contempt
for not paying the mortgage when I
did not have the money and wife was
living in my house protected by my
prenup - TOTALLY ILLEGAL by case
law and prenup contract!!!!
sentenced me to 30 days and never
enforced, though wife moved out and
kind of acquiesced making the order
moot after the pretrial on the prenup
where they admitted the prenup was
valid (except for a small illegal
carve out her attorney try to get).
But the contempt finding still hangs
is your responsibility to fight these.
As a civil debt with no contract collection
is difficult and I have heard most
attorneys don't even try to collect
appeals forced judge to take me more
seriously - though this pisses them
off a bit too. He now has 3 different
appeals hanging over him from me,
so if I file civil rights suit against
him there is a clear history and pattern
of judicial abuse there (if I fight
and win, which is very likely).
If no appeal you are accepting his/her
ruling. I asked for a finding
of facts on this, as you always should,
and this was granted but never
done by judge. As I understand it
most judges will not enforce the sentence
while under appeal. He is getting
more and more irritated as I learn
more and more and he knows I know
he is doing illegal things. I count
about 22 illegal things my judge has
done now - averaging about 4 per hour
in front of him or on illegal act
each 15 minutes. He is just no realizing
that I know these things are illegal
and most people don't. Knowledge is
power!! He will have to be more careful
moving forward as I hint that a record
of real abuse and prejudice is being
can also motion for a Stay of this
sentence at both the probate and appeals
court level (must do in that order)
giving you 2 bites at the apple to
hold it off during a LONG appeal process.
By the time the appeal is done the
order and sentence may be moot anyway
or it may be dropped due to the expense
and other progress.
I LEARNED: You
should always appeal such an order
(notice of appeal to reserve that
right is just a letter within 30 days
saying you will appeal X) and fight
both the order itself and the contempt
(2 chances to win). Most of us are
so poor after this process it is easy
to make the case you can not afford
to pay it anyway. Case law says
you can not be found in contempt unless
it is PROVEN that you have the ability
to pay on the day of the contempt
hearing. They would have to bring
in a 3rd party financial statement
showing you had all that cash hidden
somewhere. So in other words
if you can not afford to pay it then
you should be able to get out of it
easy. The lawyer will forget it long
before you recover financially from
your divorce. BTW I think that pension
money does not count so if the money
is in a 401K, Roth IRA or other retirement
fund I THINK you can still have lots
of assets. So if this is coming put
all your funds into retirement accounts.
(not sure about Coverdell, but since
you can put $250,000 in these if this
is exempted too then you have lots
of place to put funds that cannot
be taken for these legal fees. Not
paying legal fees is the best way
to get the divorce resolved more quickly
- it is amazing how these will go
on and on for rich folk and poor folk
get this resolved without any real
The Fatherhood Coalition [mailto:FATHERS-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM]
On Behalf Of George Mason
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 7:55
Subject: Re: anyone know if Plaintiff
attorney bill protected like child
So while still in a temporary order,
the marital estate would have to file
bankruptcy, not just one of the individuals?
"Marasa, Fred" <Fred.Marasa@SPHS.COM>
Well now, that is interesting
information that I didn't know.
As a matter of fact, now that
you mentioned that, I do recall
something in the judgment that
the judge ordered me to pay her
attorney's fees amounting to something
like $17,000.00. But I have not
paid any of that myself. That
was in N.Y. and I am in R.I..
Do you think that may play a role
as to why I haven't been notified
that I am in contempt?
In a contempt
situation this is not true.
So you were lucky, I wasn't
and he might not be so. All
they have to do is find him
in contempt and order him to
pay. I can show you a
copy of such resulting in a
deferred 7 day sentence if you
don't believe me.
DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT PLAINTIFF'S
LAWYER'S BILL (UNLESS YOU'RE THE PLAINTIFF).
HER ATTORNEY KNOWS THAT HE/SHE WILL
NOT GET PAID (FROM YOU ANYWAY). THEY
MAY BE SO BOLD AS TO SEND YOU A BILL
OR EVEN SEND IT TO AN OFFICIAL BILL
COLLECTING AGENCY, LIKE SOME OTHER
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. JUST IGNORE IT.
THE SAME HAPPENED TO ME AND IF YOU
ARE SO STUPID TO EVEN PAY A PORTION
OF IT, THEN THEY'LL TREAT IT AS IF
YOU MUST PAY IT. I IGNORED THE BILL
AND I NEVER EVEN RECEIVED A SECOND
BILL AND IT NEVER WENT TO A BILL COLLECTING
AGENCY. THERE IS NOTHING THAT THEY
CAN DO. PERIOD. YOU NEVER CONTRACTED
THE PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY SO IT IS
NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY.
File the lawyers
invoice in the bankruptcy.
Also send him a notice denying any
liability for that debt. Just write
DEBT DENIED on the bill and send
a copy back.
Unless the Judges
orders you to pay her fees,
its not a legal debt. Even
if the Judge orders it, you can
"bankrupt it." or just
ignore it. It is a civil debt and
should be treated as such.
It is my practice
to just ignore these bills and claims
of debt. I have never had a lawyer
try to collect a court ordered fee
from me. They have better
things to do with their time that
will be MORE profitable. Should
they ever decide to try to collect,
I will run them through an unbelievable
process taking hours and hours of
billable time, and final result
is they will still not collect.
I would demand all their billings
for all their clients for the last
5 years for a starter. I did this
to Bank of America collectors last
year and the lawyers retreated!!
I currently have
over $20,000 in alleged attorney
debts ordered by Judges over the
last 10 years. I have never
determined if I owe the lawyer or
the EX from the order. It 's unclear
who to pay. The Judge just orders
you to pay it. There can be
no contempt from an unclear order. The
above advice is based on real experience.
Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Subject: anyone know if Plaintiff
attorney bill protected like child
Anyone know if filing bankruptcy
the plaintiff's lawyers invoice
is treated like taxes due or child
Posted at Krights:
can NOT be bankrupted. Period.
Neither can alimony, nor some
other things, like taxes,
and even student loans (the last
one is usually not, although there
are exceptions for this under
proven "undue hardship").
See the federal law itself:
specifically - 11 USC 523(a)(5)
Also, a person can get into SERIOUS
trouble for even trying it:
11 USC 110, generally HOWEVER,
there are ALSO laws that protect
people against child support garnishments
that are too high. If a judge
ordered an amount of child
support that violates either 15
USC 1673, or your own state's
mandatorily-same law, then that
child order (1) may NOT even be
made in the first place, (2) may
NOT be executed [like via income
withholding or other means], and
(3) may NOT be enforced in any
manner (like contempt or criminal
charges for arrearages). Indiana's
version is IC 24-4.5-104 &
105, specifically the latter's
version's section (c)...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Amir H. Sanjari"
Cc: "Indiana CRC" <IndianaCRC@yahoogroups.com;
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005
Subject: [IndianaCRC] RE: [victimsoflaw]
Lewko doesn't say explicitly that
one can bankrupt child support.
But as it is a debt "Like
any other debt", by implication,
it would be subject to the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act,
and other consumer credit laws
because it has been declared to
be a common, commercial debt (see
below excerpts from Lewko).
Therefore, as such a debt, it
maybe discharged in bankruptcy.
Any other relevant case laws in
this regard addressing the bankruptcy
explicitly would be useful. Are
there any case laws or statutes
that explicitly state what categories
of debt are dischargeable ?
2- That child support payment
"enforced through civil remedies.
could mean that the court can
NOT use contempt against the non-custodial
parent for non-payment (unless
non-payment arises out of fraud).
hopefully this should reign in
the judges from their excesses.
3- Additionally, and maybe even
more importantly, one should note
what it says about accountability
by the custodial parent that s/he
"demonstrate that he or she
is using that money for the care
upbringing of the child. "
Using this, a non-custodial parent
could sue the custodial parent
Lewko case regards child
support as ' a "thing"
106 F.3d at 1033. '.
"Although the non-custodial
parent has a duty to provide financial
support, the custodial parent
must also demonstrate that he
or she is using that money for
the care and upbringing of the
child. Regardless, a child support
obligation arising from a court
order, whether family court or
another civil court, is a debt
that may be enforced through civil
See Mussari, 95 F.3d at 790 ("True,
the court order arises from the
family relation. Once in place,
the order creates a debt. Like
any other debt, it is a thing
of value, one of millions of obligations
that make up the stream of commerce
subject to congressional control.");
see also Bongiorno, 106 F.3d at
1032 (holding that state-court-imposed
child support orders are "functionally
equivalent to interstate contracts"
and rejecting idea that child
support payment obligations are
(citing Sage, 92 F.3d at 106).
Therefore, ......attempt to carve
out child support payments from
other types of interstate monetary
transfers in satisfaction of a
financial obligation fails."
"Just as we have previously
determined that the payment is
a "thing in interstate commerce,"
we similarly have no trouble finding
that the payment must travel through
"channels of interstate commerce"
to reach the deserving party,
and therefore falls within the
purview of Congress' Commerce
Clause authority. See Bailey,
115 F.3d at 1227. Whether transmitted
via wire transfer or through the
mails, these payments necessarily
change hands as a result of travel
through interstate commercial
channels. See also Mussari, 95
F.3d at 790. "
At 09:32 AM 11/25/05 Friday, you
I'm totally confused. Please cite
the case and the ruling itself
related to child support being
a 'commercial debt" and/or
laws' i cannot locate it.
From: AHS <email@example.com
Subject: RE: [victimsoflaw] You
can get out of Child Support
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 01:27:11
I realize that Lewko doesn't say
one can bankrupt child support,
but by implication, if it is a
commercial debt, as it has been
declared, it would be subject
to the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act, and other consumer credit
laws, one may try arguing that
as it is declared to be a common,
commercial debt, then it could
Wouldn't you agree ?
At 09:35 AM 11/24/05 Thursday,
It would be a lot easier for you
to understand if you actually
read the opinions. The First Circuit
explained the situation.
prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
<?xml:namespace prefix = st1
/U.S. v. LEWKO, 269
(1st Cir. 2001)
UNITED STATES, Appellee, v. RICHARD
C. LEWKO, Defendant, Appellant.
United States Court of Appeals,
October 25, 2001.
From: "Dr. Amir H. Sanjari"
Victims Of Law
Subject: [victimsoflaw] Fwd: [IndianaCRC]
Re: [FRC] You can get out
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 01:11:34
Sorry, 1st circuit incorporates
MA, NH, ME & RI (not the other
ones I mentioned in my earlier
My apologies. Everything
else in the email (below) stands.
a lawyer recently said if
the court awards attorney fees
to the custodial parent, then
those expenses would be viewed
(<== I DON'T
BELIEVE THIS - NO LAWYER FEE IS
CS though they would LOVE to have
you believe this!!) support and
therefore NOT dischargeable in
bankruptcy here in 1st Circuit
fess are definitely dischargeable
in bankruptcy and they know this
(Massachusetts, N.Y., ...) . He
also said that neither would child
support be dischargeable in bankruptcy
(yes CS is not dischargeable).
He relied on the authority that
the US Congress devised the child
support laws, therefore, they
take precendent. But the Congress
can legislate laws that court
could strike down as unconstitutional,
Yet, 1st circuit court of appeals
(Lewko 2001) says that child support
is like a normal commercial debt,
which, by implication, and under
fair credit act, would be dischargeable
So, which one is right ? Has anyone
got a straight answer / case laws?
At 08:20 PM 11/22/05 Tuesday,
I'm just a bit amazed right now,
so forgive my sarcasm. This is
happening to a custodial Dad right
now in MI. Mom's arrears are approx.
She's avoided paying in every
way possible by giving the court
incorrect information, but this
takes the cake. This is an update
sorta to my last post.
OK, Did you know that you can
file bankruptcy in MI, get an
automatic stay from collections
from your creditor's and get out
of enforcement of your CS arrears?
Then post bankruptcy if you don't
pay your weekly support obligation
for months, you can get out of
enforcement of those arrears??
Even if there is an Income withholding
given to your employer, you can
manipulate that employer not to
take out CS from your wages on
certain weeks, up to as many as
you want until someone from the
court says Please send a payment.
Then the employer can send as
little or as much as they want?
Did you know you could do this??
Welcome to reality! Now I'm not
recommending this route, because
I think both parents shouldsupport
their children. Good Lord, where
is the justice? Maybe I'm misunderstanding
Amir H. Sanjari
Amir H. Sanjari (Dr)
Member: American Nuclear Society
American Association of Physicists