TX:Judge orders man to pay 96k in divorce settlement even though she was married to two other men

[srothstein]

Here is another story. Apparently this woman has a criminal history. She probably had a better attorney than Athans.

However, according to Athans, his son began to research Parchem and learned she had a criminal history.

“Some things just didn’t add up,” Athans said. “He went and did a background check on her and found she had a criminal record. I never knew anything about that.

“I trusted someone I know I shouldn’t have.”

Note: Do a background check before you get involved or married.

https://www.yourconroenews.com/neighbor ... 382233.php

This actually explains why he was ordered to pay support. He filed for divorce because of fraud in the marriage. Not the fraud of her already being married, but the fraud of her having a criminal record and not telling him.

He should just move to dismiss the divorce suit. Then if he proves she was already married, he is not legally married and does not need a divorce (as I understand that part of the law).

Obviously, IANAL and may be missing something else in the law that applies.

[03Lightningrocks]

Here is another story. Apparently this woman has a criminal history. She probably had a better attorney than Athans.

However, according to Athans, his son began to research Parchem and learned she had a criminal history.

“Some things just didn’t add up,” Athans said. “He went and did a background check on her and found she had a criminal record. I never knew anything about that.

“I trusted someone I know I shouldn’t have.”

Note: Do a background check before you get involved or married.

https://www.yourconroenews.com/neighbor ... 382233.php

This actually explains why he was ordered to pay support. He filed for divorce because of fraud in the marriage. Not the fraud of her already being married, but the fraud of her having a criminal record and not telling him.

He should just move to dismiss the divorce suit. Then if he proves she was already married, he is not legally married and does not need a divorce (as I understand that part of the law).

Obviously, IANAL and may be missing something else in the law that applies.

By cracky, I bet that's it. Makes perfect sense. The judge had to rule based on the reason for him filing for divorce.

[narcissist]

getting bad flashbacks from my ex

[WildBill]

Here is another story. Apparently this woman has a criminal history. She probably had a better attorney than Athans.

However, according to Athans, his son began to research Parchem and learned she had a criminal history.

“Some things just didn’t add up,” Athans said. “He went and did a background check on her and found she had a criminal record. I never knew anything about that.

“I trusted someone I know I shouldn’t have.”

Note: Do a background check before you get involved or married.

https://www.yourconroenews.com/neighbor ... 382233.php

This actually explains why he was ordered to pay support. He filed for divorce because of fraud in the marriage. Not the fraud of her already being married, but the fraud of her having a criminal record and not telling him.

He should just move to dismiss the divorce suit. Then if he proves she was already married, he is not legally married and does not need a divorce (as I understand that part of the law).

Obviously, IANAL and may be missing something else in the law that applies.

By cracky, I bet that's it. Makes perfect sense. The judge had to rule based on the reason for him filing for divorce.

[Grayling813]

This actually explains why he was ordered to pay support. He filed for divorce because of fraud in the marriage. Not the fraud of her already being married, but the fraud of her having a criminal record and not telling him.

He should just move to dismiss the divorce suit. Then if he proves she was already married, he is not legally married and does not need a divorce (as I understand that part of the law).

Obviously, IANAL and may be missing something else in the law that applies.

The judge should have annulled the marriage based upon the fact it was illegal and dismissed any claims the woman had against the man she committed the bigamy crime against.

Stupidly following the law doesn't make it right.

[philip964]

This actually explains why he was ordered to pay support. He filed for divorce because of fraud in the marriage. Not the fraud of her already being married, but the fraud of her having a criminal record and not telling him.

He should just move to dismiss the divorce suit. Then if he proves she was already married, he is not legally married and does not need a divorce (as I understand that part of the law).

Obviously, IANAL and may be missing something else in the law that applies.

The judge should have annulled the marriage based upon the fact it was illegal and dismissed any claims the woman had against the man she committed the bigamy crime against.

Stupidly following the law doesn't make it right.

I agree.

[03Lightningrocks]

This actually explains why he was ordered to pay support. He filed for divorce because of fraud in the marriage. Not the fraud of her already being married, but the fraud of her having a criminal record and not telling him.

He should just move to dismiss the divorce suit. Then if he proves she was already married, he is not legally married and does not need a divorce (as I understand that part of the law).

Obviously, IANAL and may be missing something else in the law that applies.

The judge should have annulled the marriage based upon the fact it was illegal and dismissed any claims the woman had against the man she committed the bigamy crime against.

Stupidly following the law doesn't make it right.

My experiences with the law have taught me that what seems right has no influence. The letter of the law is all that really matters. Emotions/feelings don't get to be introduced.