Board 8 > So my relationship is over...

(+) Yeah! (+)

Yeah, texts and emails are allowed to be submitted to the court, if you have a lawyer, in a custody case. You cannot submit these things without one, oddly enough.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Yeah, texts and emails are allowed to be submitted to the court, if you have a lawyer, in a custody case. You cannot submit these things without one, oddly enough.

Because they want it done in proper and productive avenues and not just any idiot throwing shit at the Judge. Many rules of Court are created from Judges just outright being like "I'm sick of these pro se idiots doing this shit so we'll make it more of a pain in the ass for them to."

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Because they want it done in proper and productive avenues and not just any idiot throwing shit at the Judge. Many rules of Court are created from Judges just outright being like "I'm sick of these pro se idiots doing this shit so we'll make it more of a pain in the ass for them to."

But, if you represent yourself, you are held to the standards of the bar for being a lawyer. So, it's kind of contradictory.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I forget to lock my door a lot. = /

this is probably something you should work on, especially since you seem to be pretty wealthy (given that you own a house with a pool).

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

this is probably something you should work on, especially since you seem to be pretty wealthy (given that you own a house with a pool).

lol? Not sure if serious on the pool or wealthy comment.

---

i know a few people who are quite rich and none of them own a pool!

maybe having a pool is more common in the US than in my country? i dunno.

---

Nah you're still rich if you have your own pool Corrik is just out of touch

As I posted a couple of weeks ago, you should install security cameras in your house.

You may not be able to record your conversations, but having video evidence of her breaking into your house would probably be useful.

You can buy a pool for like 300 bucks. Lol

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

One of my closest friends paid for the lawyers in the divorce because of a financial discrepancy between him and his ex and because it was reasonably amicable and they had an idea of what they wanted already, and Judges look favorably towards that.

I feel like it would be a conflict of interest to be paid by the opposing side's client >_> Not an expert but it seems like it could go bad real fast.
---

Did you buy your pool for 300 bucks?

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Did you buy your pool for 300 bucks?

It came with my house.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

maybe having a pool is more common in the US than in my country? i dunno.

In the US it goes like this:

Above ground pool: poor trash
No pool: middle class
In-ground pool: billionaire

I am poor trash = (

---

This girl I am talking to and going on a date with next week is a hardcore liberal. Lol. = /

---

Corrik7 posted...

This girl I am talking to and going on a date with next week is a hardcore liberal. Lol. = /

They all are until they realize marrying a successful conservative is their only hope for an in-ground pool.

She already gave me the dealbreaker political stances. Lol.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I got a Xbox Series X.

You have truly hit rock bottom.

---

Corrik7 posted...

But, if you represent yourself, you are held to the standards of the bar for being a lawyer. So, it's kind of contradictory.

I think you severely underestimate how much every judge hates someone who represents themselves. Like, it's a true nightmare and just makes any legal proceeding suck out loud. When we have to deal with anyone pro se at my firm, we just groan and pray they can find counsel immediately.

Yes, you're held to the same standards, but no, that doesn't mean any Judge wants to put up with it and the entire legal system is created with it in mind that you get a lawyer to make it go as smoothly as possible.

Drakeryn posted...

I feel like it would be a conflict of interest to be paid by the opposing side's client >_> Not an expert but it seems like it could go bad real fast.

It's mostly to get the divorce (or in this case custody) proceedings over it with the idea in mind that with legal counsel they can get it over with quicker. This is also bearing in mind that a financial discrepancy would make it harder. If a woman is taking care of the kids, but the man is making a lot more money and will be shelling out plenty of money in child support, yeah. Pay for the lawyer to get the divorce done and over with. It's a costly process, and if things are intended to go smoothly then there's no issue in the person with the money paying for it. It also makes you look more favorable to the Judge who, if you're making loads of money with kids involved and you're not paying for all the legal fees for a divorce without a good reason, you look like kind of a dick forcing the poor, underpaid, overworked woman pay for her own fees.

Bearing in mind that Corrik had the idea that his ex would be able to handle this amicably and he didn't want to "punish her" by dragging her into a custody proceeding, paying for her lawyer wouldn't have been a bad idea. Since she has made it clear she wants to fuck Corrik over, no. Don't pay for the lawyer to fuck you over.

This idea of paying for the other party's lawyer does NOT extend past divorce/custody matters though, and you'll never see the idea floated around anywhere else.

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

I think you severely underestimate how much every judge hates someone who represents themselves. Like, it's a true nightmare and just makes any legal proceeding suck out loud. When we have to deal with anyone pro se at my firm, we just groan and pray they can find counsel immediately.

Yes, you're held to the same standards, but no, that doesn't mean any Judge wants to put up with it and the entire legal system is created with it in mind that you get a lawyer to make it go as smoothly as possible.

It's mostly to get the divorce (or in this case custody) proceedings over it with the idea in mind that with legal counsel they can get it over with quicker. This is also bearing in mind that a financial discrepancy would make it harder. If a woman is taking care of the kids, but the man is making a lot more money and will be shelling out plenty of money in child support, yeah. Pay for the lawyer to get the divorce done and over with. It's a costly process, and if things are intended to go smoothly then there's no issue in the person with the money paying for it. It also makes you look more favorable to the Judge who, if you're making loads of money with kids involved and you're not paying for all the legal fees for a divorce without a good reason, you look like kind of a dick forcing the poor, underpaid, overworked woman pay for her own fees.

Bearing in mind that Corrik had the idea that his ex would be able to handle this amicably and he didn't want to "punish her" by dragging her into a custody proceeding, paying for her lawyer wouldn't have been a bad idea. Since she has made it clear she wants to fuck Corrik over, no. Don't pay for the lawyer to fuck you over.

This idea of paying for the other party's lawyer does NOT extend past divorce/custody matters though, and you'll never see the idea floated around anywhere else.

If they are that poor, they can get free counsel though.

---

That's only for public defenders regarding criminal proceedings. Even I know that.

Edit: Like theoretically maybe you can find someone who will take a divorce/custody case pro bono, but good luck with that.
---

ChainLTTP posted...

In the US it goes like this:

Above ground pool: poor trash
No pool: middle class
In-ground pool: billionaire

What? You can get houses with in-ground pools for like 300k

EDIT: It's not like it's crazy expensive to add one either. Average cost is $40-60k.

Our house has a good size in-ground pool, and we got it as a foreclosure for like $130k. Nevermind that this was ~10 years ago while the market was still recovering from '08.

---

They're probably a lot more affordable in the Southwest US, where land is plentiful and pools often come standard in many suburban homes. I assume that isn't the case in the Midwest or East coast.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If they are that poor, they can get free counsel though.

kevwaffles posted...

That's only for public defenders regarding criminal proceedings. Even I know that.

Edit: Like theoretically maybe you can find someone who will take a divorce/custody case pro bono, but good luck with that.

---

Hey guys I'm going to be a father. Corrik, any advice?

ChainLTTP posted...

Hey guys I'm going to be a father. Corrik, any advice?

= /

---

kevwaffles posted...

That's only for public defenders regarding criminal proceedings. Even I know that.

Edit: Like theoretically maybe you can find someone who will take a divorce/custody case pro bono, but good luck with that.

https://www.pafamilylawyers.com/family-law-faqs/what-should-i-do-if-i-cant-afford-an-attorney/

https://spla.org/home/families/

What do even you know?

---

Dude, low income assistance programs are not the same thing as getting a free lawyer.

Edit: In fact, the only way you probably end up paying nothing through this route is if they successfully sue the other party for your legal fees. And if they have a case for that, then it goes back to just paying for the other side's legal fees in the first place to look better.
---

kevwaffles posted...

Dude, low income assistance programs are not the same thing as getting a free lawyer.

Edit: In fact, the only way you probably end up paying nothing through this route is if they successfully sue the other party for your legal fees. And if they have a case for that, then it goes back to just paying for the other side's legal fees in the first place to look better.

"Depending on the issue, we can give you advice, represent you in court, or help you fill out complicated legal paperwork. And if you qualify, our services will be free to you."

Please don't do that thing where you argue against what is explicitly written in front of you... ugh!

---

Read what you bolded again and think really, really hard how it might actually be a vague allusion to the scenario I just put forth.
---

*sigh*

Corrik7 posted...

If they are that poor, they can get free counsel though.

kevwaffles posted...

That's only for public defenders regarding criminal proceedings. Even I know that.

Edit: Like theoretically maybe you can find someone who will take a divorce/custody case pro bono, but good luck with that.

Corrik7 posted...

"Depending on the issue, we can give you advice, represent you in court, or help you fill out complicated legal paperwork. And if you qualify, our services will be free to you."

Listen, kind of a pointless argument. They tell you at the courthouse resources are available to you if you can provide evidence of not having enough income.

---

Dude, the key parts of that sentence are "if you qualify" and "free to you".

"If you qualify" = Just because they'll represent you doesn't mean this sentence applies to you. In fact it's more likely it doesn't.

"Free to you" = They're going into this anticipating that someone is paying for it, just not you.
---

kevwaffles posted...

Dude, the key parts of that sentence are "if you qualify" and "free to you".

"If you qualify" = Just because they'll represent you doesn't mean this sentence applies to you. In fact it's more likely it doesn't.

"Free to you" = They're going into this anticipating that someone is paying for it, just not you.

Welcome to gamefaqs where people will argue shit nonstop without even knowing what they are talking about. You are guessing because you don't want to admit you just were wrong initially because you acted mightier than thou with how you worded your initial statement. I get it, man. Not interested in arguing with someone regarding stuff. Literally at the court house they mentioned this option, and it is why I said she had that option.

---

Corrik, I went to the second link and looked at Child Custody and Divorce and both of them basically say that they won't represent you under how they can help. Lol They'll only do the most abrupt things like when abuse is involved to get a separation of a child, but they offer resources otherwise.

---

Corrik, I'm just gonna be completely frank with you in a way I usually try to avoid.

You are not smarter than me. You are not smarter than at least half of the regular posters on this board. Stop finding a few buzzwords that you think support your argument because it never actually does. Your arguments are the type of BS I expect someone to follow with the damn 4Head emote but you're actually playing it straight.

Good luck with your kid. I do actually mean that.
---

Bluntly, any service that offers free lawyers is a service you should expect the bare minimum of assistance. You're gonna pay one way or the other.

---

I miss mopey Corrik. Now that he's got his mojo back he's much less likeable.

---

kevwaffles posted...

Corrik, I'm just gonna be completely frank with you in a way I usually try to avoid.

You are not smarter than me. You are not smarter than at least half of the regular posters on this board. Stop finding a few buzzwords that you think support your argument because it never actually does. Your arguments are the type of BS I expect someone to follow with the damn 4Head emote but you're actually playing it straight.

Good luck with your kid. I do actually mean that.

You are right. I am not smarter than half of them. But I am smarter than you because I literally was at the courthouse and know what was said, and you don't have a clue and aren't smart enough to stop acting like you know. Just shut up. Seriously. Tired of you always trying to find an argument non-stop and arguing what you don't know and trying to circle into it when you are wrong.

---

You know what, Corrik? I don't wish you luck with your kid. I hope your ex gets full custody because for all the nightmare stories you've told us about her over the years I still have to consider the source they came from. I just can't imagine a person turning out better for having you to raise them.
---

kevwaffles posted...

You know what, Corrik? I don't wish you luck with your kid. I hope your ex gets full custody because for all the nightmare stories you've told us about her over the years I still have to consider the source they came from. I just can't imagine a person turning out better for having you to raise them.

That is well over the line.

---

I've spent probably the better part of a decade playing with kid gloves with him when he has never given me a reason aside from pity, and this is far from the first time he's talked to me like this. So I really don't care.
---

kevwaffles posted...

for all the nightmare stories you've told us about her over the years I still have to consider the source they came from.

Hallelujah, it only took until post 391 for someone to finally reach this conclusion. What a topic!

---

kevwaffles posted...

You know what, Corrik? I don't wish you luck with your kid. I hope your ex gets full custody because for all the nightmare stories you've told us about her over the years I still have to consider the source they came from. I just can't imagine a person turning out better for having you to raise them.

Cool. Nobody cares.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

That is well over the line.

Not a big deal. He is literally incapable of coherent thought. He just said something only happens in criminal cases, literally I have first source knowledge regarding it, and a website I have shown him literally stating it offers said services in limited situations for non-criminal cases. Yet, he still thinks he is right because why? Nobody knows.

Best to just ignore people who just live their lives trying to argue to get their kicks for the day.

I ain't worried about it. You ain't gotta either, bro.

---

Bane_Of_Despair posted...

Hallelujah, it only took until post 391 for someone to finally reach this conclusion. What a topic!

Oh I didn't reach it just now. But like I said to Chris, kid's gloves and pity.

Corrik7 posted...

Cool. Nobody cares.

Someone literally already jumped to your defense for you. But I guess Chris' opinion is just as valuable as anyone else's here to you, which is why I don't get why he bothers constantly being your advocate in these situations.

---

ShatteredElysium posted...

EDIT: It's not like it's crazy expensive to add one either. Average cost is $40-60k.

Is that the average cost for an in ground pool? I am assuming so based on the line above it. Because that sounds really high for an above ground pool.

---

colliding posted...

I miss mopey Corrik. Now that he's got his mojo back he's much less likeable.

= (

---

PrivateBiscuit1 posted...

Corrik, I went to the second link and looked at Child Custody and Divorce and both of them basically say that they won't represent you under how they can help. Lol They'll only do the most abrupt things like when abuse is involved to get a separation of a child, but they offer resources otherwise.

It depends on case-load. If they are backed up, they only do the most extreme cases, but yes, they can possibly represent you if your financial situation meets it, and their case-load allows for it. It's the same with child support cases also.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Yet, he still thinks he is right because why? Nobody knows.

You're welcome to find one person to come out and say I was flat out wrong about any part of what I said before getting outright insulting.

It's not that nobody understands what I'm saying when you respond like this. It's that everyone else has given up on engaging with you and I'm the only person here as stubborn as you are to continue it long enough. But don't worry. We're done with that. You're either well aware and just trying to piss me off (in which case congratulations you have succeeded gloriously) or you really are far more hopeless than I could possibly imagine.

In either case, don't expect any more pushback from me. I've said my piece and now I'm more than happy to let you think you've won any and all future potential disputes from here on out.

---