Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsTuesday, July 24, 2007 5:27 PM CDT
Man must pay partnered ex-wife alimony
Advertisement

LOS ANGELES -- A judge has ordered a man to continue paying alimony to his ex-wife - even though she's in a registered domestic partnership with another woman and even uses the other woman's last name.

California marriage laws say alimony ends when a former spouse remarries, and Ron Garber thought that meant he was off the hook when he learned his ex-wife had registered her new relationship under the state's domestic partnership law.

An Orange County judge didn't see it that way.

The judge ruled that a registered partnership is cohabitation, not marriage, and that Garber must keep writing the checks, $1,250 a month, to his ex-wife, Melinda Kirkwood. Gerber plans to appeal.

The case highlights questions about the legal status of domestic partnerships, an issue the California Supreme Court is weighing as it considers whether same-sex marriage is legal. An appeals court upheld the state's ban on same-sex marriage last year, citing the state's domestic partners law and ruling that it was up to the Legislature to decide whether gays could wed.

Lawyers arguing favor of same-sex marriage say they will cite the June ruling in the Orange County case as a reason to unite gay and heterosexual couples under one system: marriage.

In legal briefs due in August to the California Supreme Court, Therese Stewart, chief deputy city attorney for San Francisco, intends to argue that same sex couples should have access to marriage and that domestic partnership doesn't provide the same reverence and respect as marriage.

The alimony ruling shows "the irrationality of having a separate, unequal scheme" for same-sex partners, Stewart said.

Garber knew his former wife was living with another woman when he agreed to the alimony, but he said he didn't know the two women had registered with the state as domestic partners under a law that was intended to mirror marriage.

"This is not about gay or lesbian," Garber said. "This is about the law being fair."

Kirkwood's attorney, Edwin Fahlen, said the agreement was binding regardless of whether his client was registered as a domestic partner or even married. He said both sides agreed the pact could not be modified and Garber waived his right to investigate the nature of Kirkwood's relationship.

Garber's attorney, William M. Hulsy, disagreed.

"If he had signed that agreement under the same factual scenario except marriage, not domestic partnership, his agreement to pay spousal support would be null and void," Hulsy said.

Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 20 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

RegularGuy wrote on Aug 8, 2007 5:48 PM:

" If there is one truism in divorce, it's that 'the guy pays.' From alimony to her legal fees to child support, the guy pays. I look forward to the day when the 'equality' women enjoy in education and in the workplace FINALLY trickles down to men in divorce court. Until then, 'The Guy Pays." "

One unlucky dude! wrote on Aug 8, 2007 11:32 AM:

" This hurts man! I feel for him, my ex cheated on me and loved to go out and do drugs and drink all night (while I stayed home with child). Since I am a disabled veteran (and back in school), I could not afford a long court battle when we divorced and had to borrow the money for the attorney I 'did' have. Since It was my word against hers, she got custody and I had to pay her temporary alimony, and of course, continuous child support. I had to move in with my mom. She took up residence in another state and had one her boyfriends move in with her. Now, I can never see my child due to my financial situation(I can never save enough to go see him). I pay her almost my entire paycheck and I heard she was planning a trip to Vegas with boyfriend. I recently filed for bankruptcy and had to take up a family collection to pay for the bankruptcy attorney. I know this has nothing to do with same sex marriage, but still, there is something wrong! "

al wrote on Aug 4, 2007 12:03 AM:

" obviously this whole marriage should be null and void. She was born a lesbian and married him under false pretense. Now she gets a free check for being an embarrassing chapter in his life, one he has to relive every month. He should be suing her! "

RE: Wrong wrote on Aug 3, 2007 10:48 AM:

" It's the Republican's fault on this one. You say that same sex marriage isn't the same, then the judge ruled correctly. Until you allow marriage for anyone, this is ruled correctly under the law. It's not right, but neither is denying benefits to people who have dedicated their lives to each other. BTW, you say the same sex marriage isn't the same. That's good because "regular" marriages rarely work. I would hope they wouldn't be the "same". "

BN Cynic wrote on Jul 27, 2007 11:01 AM:

" That's stupid. The judge should have let him off the hook. "

TO: Joe from Gov't Opressed Mule wrote on Jul 25, 2007 4:18 PM:

" How wrong can the laws get???? Look out your window at the fascist laws that we are forced to live w/ every day. "

No Alimony for anyone wrote on Jul 24, 2007 3:20 PM:

" I believe alimony is an insult to us hardworking, independent women. Alimony should be a thing of the past! "

Alimony Shmalimony wrote on Jul 24, 2007 2:21 PM:

" What an antiquated concept. Child support, fine. But alimony? She should get her lazy rear off the couch and start working for a living like the rest of us. The obvious answer is for the state legislature to ammend the alimony law to include domestic partnerships. Better yet, get rid of it altogether. There can't be more than a couple states who still have it. "

Joe wrote on Jul 24, 2007 10:56 AM:

" How wrong can the law get...so many women love to rake their ex's over the coals again and again and again. I know a couple of nurses here in town that have divorced doctors and receive alimony from them...and already live with another doctor who take care of them...just as long as she doesn't remarry she can still get paid by her ex. These type of people are very low and are glorified prostitutes. "

To "Wrong" wrote on Jul 24, 2007 9:35 AM:

" I agree / She wants her cake and eat it up - Thank God what goes around comes around - wants to live off others? Where is her self respect? "

Haha! wrote on Jul 24, 2007 9:16 AM:

" I think this is pretty funny. Maybe if her new marriage was legal, then this wouldn't even be an issue. Come on everyone! Jump on the bandwagon...just remember that once interracial marriage was illegal, slavery was legal and women couldn't vote. Times are a'changin! "

to double standard: wrote on Jul 24, 2007 8:51 AM:

" exactly what kind of special treatment do you think women get? is it the lower paying jobs, having to live on welfare cause there is no child support, being the last to get voting rights, or the sexual harrassment we recieve on a daily basis? tell me cause i have a hard time believing i have any special treatment. "

More than being special wrote on Jul 24, 2007 7:26 AM:

" Had that Court ordered the alimony to stop...that would elevate domestic partnerships to the level of marriage, in the eyes of the law. That is not something the legal system is willing to do at this point. That guy is trapped paying alimony in this situation because that Court does not want to set that precedent. That's the bottom line here. "

to:double standard wrote on Jul 24, 2007 7:01 AM:

" You might add that I'd bet they are listed as beneficiary,insured under each others insurance policy and this poor guy is still getting shafted for being normal. Some states have laws of alienation of affection. Seldom used but if it's in his state he should sue. What a joke our legal systems have become! "

WRONG wrote on Jul 24, 2007 6:41 AM:

" This is wrong. He must have a gay judge. Same sex marriage does NOT deserve the same reverence and respect as a heteralsexual marriage. What is wrong with people today. She wants her cake and eat it too. She wants her GAY partner, but wants her ex-husband to support them?? And a judge allowed this???? Wow!!!!!! He got taken, big time. "

thats bo wrote on Jul 24, 2007 5:12 AM:

" why pain when she with other women ,, who are women, and what she doing is wrong agains God . just like pay child support now its women support thats not fair to men "

what a rip-off.. wrote on Jul 24, 2007 1:26 AM:

" poor guy.he is never gonna get a break unless they allow same -sex marriages.oh heck,he is screwed. "

Wow wrote on Jul 23, 2007 7:20 PM:

" Oh man, when the day is looking bad, I will remember this guy. Oh, I am so sorry, buddy......good luck. "

Thats just not right! wrote on Jul 23, 2007 5:39 PM:

" She moved on with her life, why can't he move on with his instead of always have to pay for his ex and her lover. Liberty is dead. "

double standard wrote on Jul 23, 2007 5:30 PM:

" no one would disagree with me that if the tables were turned, the woman would no longer have to pay. that's our country. we treat women special, even when they go against human nature and turn gay. "

Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?