How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Ely Your Own Question
Ely
Ely, Counselor at Law
Category: Family Law
Satisfied Customers: 100044
Experience:  Private practice with focus on family, criminal, PI, consumer protection, and business consultation.
7286322
Type Your Family Law Question Here...
Ely is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

My husband agreed to pay alimony cats to his ex wife

Customer Question

My husband agreed to pay alimony for two cats to his ex wife if she provided proof of vet visits etc. He heard nothing and 15 years later she filed a motion for $2900. We can't afford counsel but did talk to an attorney who implied my husband may be responsible. My husband never heard from her all these years. She remarried but refuses to say when she remarried. My husband can't recall if he ever paid her at one time but he may have. He is 70 years old has limited funds and told her attorney that he also filed bankruptcy approximately 2 years ago. Why can she now demand payment.
Submitted: 7 months ago.
Category: Family Law
Expert:  Ely replied 7 months ago.
Hello and welcome to JustAnswer. Please note: This is general information for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. No specific course of action is proposed herein, and no attorney-client relationship or privilege is formed by speaking to an expert on this site. By continuing, you confirm that you understand and agree to these terms. I am sorry to hear about this situation. Please clarify: -do you mean he agreed to make monthly payments to her, OR-did he agree to reimburse her for medical costs, OR-what exactly does the decree state? AND-is there an end date to the "alimony," or not? This is not an answer, but an information request. I need this information to answer your question. Please reply, so I can answer your question. Thank you in advance.
Customer: replied 7 months ago.
there was no end to the cat alimony and he agreed to pay $200.00 a month for both cats as long as she provided proof of life and that they were getting vaccinations.
Customer: replied 7 months ago.
Now that the cats are deceased after 15 years she is looking for payment
Customer: replied 7 months ago.
I hope this is not part of a free trial as I only wanted this service one time.
Customer: replied 7 months ago.
(Posted by JustAnswer at customer's request) Hello. I would like to request the following Expert Service(s) from you: Live Phone Call. Let me know if you need more information, or send me the service offer(s) so we can proceed.
Expert:  Ely replied 7 months ago.
Thank you. Then someone in his situation may wish to file an ANSWER (let me know if you need a sample), arguing that he did not pay because he has not paid because did not provide proof as required per the decree, and, since it has been 15 years, LACHES applies. Laches is a subjective defense that states essentially - if you take too long to bring a claim, it is too late: "Laches in a general sense is the neglect, for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, under circumstances permitting diligence, to do what in law should have been done. More specifically, it is inexcusable delay in asserting a right * * *." 30 C.J.S., § 112, pp. 520, 521. "Long lapse of time, if unexplained, may create or justify a presumption against the existence or validity of plaintiff's right and in favor of the adverse right of defendant; or a presumption that if, plaintiff was ever possessed of a right, it has been abandoned or waived, or has been in some manner satisfied; or that plaintiff has assented to, or acquiesced in, the adverse right of defendant; or a presumption that the evidence of the transaction in issue has been lost or become obscured, or that conditions have changed since the right accrued; or a presumption that the adverse party would be prejudiced by the enforcement of plaintiff's claim." 30 C.J.S. § 116 b, p. 538." Lavin v. Hackensack Bd. of Ed., 447 A. 2d 516 - NJ: Supreme Court 1982 (internal citations omitted). At this point, the Court would then decide, but the fact that it has been 15 years weighs heavily against her. I hope this helps and clarifies. Please use the SEND or REPLY button to keep chatting, or please RATE when finished. You may always ask follow ups at no charge after rating. Kindly rate my answer as one of TOP THREE FACES/STARS and then SUBMIT, as this is how experts get credit for our time. Rating my answer the bottom two faces/stars (or failing to submit the rating) does not give me credit and reflects poorly on me, even if my answer is correct. I work very hard to formulate an informative and honest answer for you; please reciprocate my good faith with a positive rating.
Expert:  Ely replied 7 months ago.
Hello again. This is a courtesy check in to see if you needed anything else in regards ***** ***** question because you never responded or replied positively. I am simply touching base. Let me know. Thanks!

Related Family Law Questions