A good question

IHateGovernment said:
If a state does not allow gay marriages... how could it force the man to continue to pay alimony to another man?

Interesting question I suppose one could argue it in court. However they are no longer married and I think the law is less clear about same sex marriage when it involves a transgendered person. The alimony could be seen as nothing more than a contractual obligation that he is still bound to.
Click to expand...

but that contract was based on marriage or the dissoloution of a marriage.
 
I don't think the payment of alimony is predicated on a marriage being illegal in a future state.

Let me give you an example. If a couple got divorced and the husband paid alimony to the wife he couldn't argue that he is no longer required to pay it if after the divorce he discovered that he and his former wife are blood relatives even though it would be illegal for them to marry had this been known.

Also marriage is a point of entry. If a person changes gender during the marriage they may remain married. If a person discovers they are related likewise they may remain married.

Both of these are grounds to deny the entry into marriage not the continuation of one.

thus the same could be argued about contractual obligation to the former spouse.
 
I've always been fascinated with transies. There was a series on Sundance called transgeneration. It chronicled 4 transgenders:two M2F and two F2M I think. Its just hard to wrap my head around mutilating one's ge net alia to feel complete. Its not like its the real deal.
FYI - M2F basically have an open wound that they have to peirce regularly or it will close/heal. Who needs that kind of pressure?
 
Well, one point in the guys favor is that those operations are expensive. If she can afford to spend $50K+ on a medically unnecessary procedure, I would hope that a lawyer could successfully argue that she doesn't need his money.
 
Well, one point in the guys favor is that those operations are expensive. If she can afford to spend $50K+ on a medically unnecessary procedure, I would hope that a lawyer could successfully argue that she doesn't need his money.

I didn't even think of that. Very good point.
 
A religious argument could also be made that he does not want his money going for a sin against god and nature operation ?
Not my view, but just a possible point.
 
IHateGovernment said:
Well, one point in the guys favor is that those operations are expensive. If she can afford to spend $50K+ on a medically unnecessary procedure, I would hope that a lawyer could successfully argue that she doesn't need his money.

I didn't even think of that. Very good point.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but at the end of the day, a deals a deal. I don't know that changing your gender excuses you from paying your debts or collecting your liabilities. If that's the case, I'll call myself a man and tell my student loan lenders that tiana's gone to a better place and Tony didn't borrow any money from them so they are SOL.
 
But it could be argued that the alimony is unecessary as she has shown she isn't in need as she could afford the operation. In fact you could say the husband helped finance it.
 
IHateGovernment said:
But it could be argued that the alimony is unecessary as she has shown she isn't in need as she could afford the operation. In fact you could say the husband helped finance it.
Click to expand...

I think you can easily say that given her monthly payments and how much those operations usually cost. At the very least the guys lawyer could argue down the almimony amount. Its seems that his ex-wife seems to be doing okay enough financially from the settlement without the alimony if s/he can afford such luxuries.

However I doubt that having elective surgery and changing your name & gender will legally get you out of liabilities. If Bank of America changes its name and moves out of residential mortgages I'd still owe them money if I borrowed it under their original name and line of business. I'm no lawyer, but I'd be shocked if he got out of it completely.
 
LadyT said:
Yeah, but at the end of the day, a deals a deal. I don't know that changing your gender excuses you from paying your debts or collecting your liabilities. If that's the case, I'll call myself a man and tell my student loan lenders that tiana's gone to a better place and Tony didn't borrow any money from them so they are SOL.
Click to expand...

student loans do not require a specific gender or marriage do they ?
Bad analogy there LadyT
 
LadyT said:
I think you can easily say that given her monthly payments and how much those operations usually cost. At the very least the guys lawyer could argue down the almimony amount. Its seems that his ex-wife seems to be doing okay enough financially from the settlement without the alimony if s/he can afford such luxuries.

However I doubt that having elective surgery and changing your name & gender will legally get you out of liabilities. If Bank of America changes its name and moves out of residential mortgages I'd still owe them money if I borrowed it under their original name and line of business. I'm no lawyer, but I'd be shocked if he got out of it completely.
Click to expand...

Umm unlike mortgages and loans I dont think the Alimony is sellable or transferrable.
Another bad analogy.
 
LadyT said:
I think you can easily say that given her monthly payments and how much those operations usually cost. At the very least the guys lawyer could argue down the almimony amount. Its seems that his ex-wife seems to be doing okay enough financially from the settlement without the alimony if s/he can afford such luxuries.

However I doubt that having elective surgery and changing your name & gender will legally get you out of liabilities. If Bank of America changes its name and moves out of residential mortgages I'd still owe them money if I borrowed it under their original name and line of business. I'm no lawyer, but I'd be shocked if he got out of it completely.
Click to expand...

I think this is pretty much untrod legal ground.
 
uscitizen said:
student loans do not require a specific gender or marriage do they ?
Bad analogy there LadyT
Click to expand...

Alimony doesn't require a specific gender either. Its a liability that is the result of a divorce. Loans are also liabilities with contractual obligations. There originations are drastically different but the end result is the same: you are obliged to pay X amount of dollars for Y amount of years.
 
LadyT said:
Alimony doesn't require a specific gender either. Its a liability that is the result of a divorce. Loans are also liabilities with contractual obligations. There originations are drastically different but the end result is the same: you are obliged to pay X amount of dollars for Y amount of years.
Click to expand...

Some alimonies are just paid until the spouse remarries.
No alimony here, I just voluntarially agreed to pay the wife an amount of money for 6 months out of the goodness of my little pinheaded heart ;)

We will have to wait and see how this case turns out. keep an eye out for the resoloution.
 
btw LadyT, you have not been in my neighborhood have you ? I am missing a cat, and knowing about your war on cats.....
 
uscitizen said:
Umm unlike mortgages and loans I dont think the Alimony is sellable or transferrable.
Another bad analogy.
Click to expand...

My point is that if you owe money to any entity in business, no matter what that entity morphs into you are generally obliged to pay them. The comparison in this case is that yes the woman did become a man, that liability is still active unless there was some contractual stipulation left out in the article.
 
Kinda depends on state laws about alimony and such and the judges interpretation of them. Like I say sort of new ground. Unlike other debts bankruptcy does not get you out of Alimony so there are differences.
 
uscitizen said:
Some alimonies are just paid until the spouse remarries.
No alimony here, I just voluntarially agreed to pay the wife an amount of money for 6 months out of the goodness of my little pinheaded heart ;)

We will have to wait and see how this case turns out. keep an eye out for the resoloution.
Click to expand...

Yep! Because the contract usually stipulates it. Unfortunately there was none here. But live and learn. It will be interesting to see how this pans out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top