Vancouver lawyer making $57,000 a month wins reduction of payments to ex-wife
By NEAL HALL | Vancouver Sun – 22 hours ago
VANCOUVER - A Vancouver lawyer making $57,000 a month recently went to court and succeeded in having his payments reduced to his ex-wife.
The lawyer, identified only as C.D. in a B.C. Supreme Court judgment, had urged the court to reduce his monthly spousal support payments to $8,500 a month this year, to be stepped down over the next three years to $5,000 a month.
Until this month, he was paying $11,500 a month to his ex-wife, A.B., plus another $49,000 a year for the educational expenses of his two children.
Justice Susan Griffin decided a more appropriate payment was $10,000 a month for the next 10 years, when the matter can be reviewed.
The judge noted that the ex-wife, a former flight attendant, did not work during the 15-year marriage and stayed home to look after the couple's two children, allowing the lawyer to work long hours and become very successful.
When the couple married in 1990, the lawyer was making $50,000 a year in Ontario.
The couple decided to move to Vancouver in 1994, where the lawyer's career took off, allowing him to earn up to $800,000 a year.
During the last three years, the lawyer has made on average $684,000, which works out to $57,000 per month.
The husband argued his ex-wife was deliberately underemployed.
The wife took an interior design course and has won awards as a "home stager" - selecting furniture and furnishing to stage homes to make them sell quickly.
She hoped to earn $15,000 to $20,000 this year, the judge pointed out.
"Her actions are inconsistent with the suggestion that she has deliberately been underemployed," the judge observed this week in a written judgment.
The judge found the wife lived a modest lifestyle in a 1919 home in North Vancouver, compared to the lifestyle of the husband, who lives in West Vancouver, has another home in Qualicum Beach, has substantial retirement savings and is earning a large income that will allow him to continue to accumulate assets and savings.
"It is very unlikely she will ever achieve self-sufficiency to a degree that overcomes the economic disadvantages of marriage or approximates the advantages the husband gained from the marriage," the judge concluded.
The judge also noted that while she saw no reason information to justify hiding the litigants' names by reducing them to initials, the husband "strongly opposed" having his name made public.
The full judgment is online at: http://bit.ly/ykLDLR
nhall@vancouversun.com
Showing posts with label canada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label canada. Show all posts
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Murder is cheaper and quicker than divorce...
Boy, can I understand this.. Thank you again LawDive for your thoughts...
"Apr 23
Murder is Cheaper and Quicker than Divorce
Posted by LawDiva in Criminal Law, Divorce, Family Law. 2 Comments
Rosa Hill had a plan to spend more time with her two year-old daughter Elizabeth. A handwritten note set out the steps: “Go to mass… Go to confession… Get tasers… Target practice…”
Her google searches in furtherance of her plan, dubbed “operation custody”, were similarly telling: “How to get away with murder…How to make a silencer….”
Rosa Hill, age 35 and her mother, Mei Li, 57, faced a California jury this week for the attempted murder of Rosa’s ex-husband Eric Hill and the murder of his 91 year-old mother, Selma Hill.
Despite her accusations that her ex-husband had molested Elizabeth, a court awarded custody of the child to Mr. Hill, who lived with his mother Selma Hill.
Rosa and her mother were aghast when the custody order was made in the face of their allegations of his history of mentally instability and psychiatric hospitalizations.
After months of planning, Rosa and her mother went to the Hill home and tasered Eric Hill and his mother. Eric’s mother did not survive the attack. Her battered body was discovered by police stuffed in a trash can. Both Rosa Hill and her mother were arrested at the scene. Rosa’s father was charged as an accessory to the crimes.
An unusual one-off event? Not at all. The number of murders and murder-sucides linked to divorce disputes is frightening.
This week alone the media highlighted several of these stories including the case of Allan Schonenborn who murdered his three young children in British Columbia in a vendetta against their mother, was found not guilty by reason of insanity, and recently sought escorted passes to visit the mall and have coffee.
Cardiologist Dr. Guy Turcotte’s trial for the murder of his children, ages 5 and 3, began in Montreal this week. He and his wife, another doctor, had separated shortly before the murders and his failed suicide attempt.
And finally, a husband in Ft. Lauderdale this week was so incensed with the court’s orders that he began beating his estranged wife right in the courtroom before he was tasered by authorities.
The last word, however, goes to grandfather David White in New Zealand whose daughter was murdered by her millionaire husband, Greg Meads. This week Mr. Meads was sentenced to 11 years in prison and ordered to pay $65,000 in compensation to Mr. White, who would now raise his grandchildren. White bitterly remarked: “It’s cheaper to murder your wife than to divorce her.”
Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang"
"Apr 23
Murder is Cheaper and Quicker than Divorce
Posted by LawDiva in Criminal Law, Divorce, Family Law. 2 Comments
Rosa Hill had a plan to spend more time with her two year-old daughter Elizabeth. A handwritten note set out the steps: “Go to mass… Go to confession… Get tasers… Target practice…”
Her google searches in furtherance of her plan, dubbed “operation custody”, were similarly telling: “How to get away with murder…How to make a silencer….”
Rosa Hill, age 35 and her mother, Mei Li, 57, faced a California jury this week for the attempted murder of Rosa’s ex-husband Eric Hill and the murder of his 91 year-old mother, Selma Hill.
Despite her accusations that her ex-husband had molested Elizabeth, a court awarded custody of the child to Mr. Hill, who lived with his mother Selma Hill.
Rosa and her mother were aghast when the custody order was made in the face of their allegations of his history of mentally instability and psychiatric hospitalizations.
After months of planning, Rosa and her mother went to the Hill home and tasered Eric Hill and his mother. Eric’s mother did not survive the attack. Her battered body was discovered by police stuffed in a trash can. Both Rosa Hill and her mother were arrested at the scene. Rosa’s father was charged as an accessory to the crimes.
An unusual one-off event? Not at all. The number of murders and murder-sucides linked to divorce disputes is frightening.
This week alone the media highlighted several of these stories including the case of Allan Schonenborn who murdered his three young children in British Columbia in a vendetta against their mother, was found not guilty by reason of insanity, and recently sought escorted passes to visit the mall and have coffee.
Cardiologist Dr. Guy Turcotte’s trial for the murder of his children, ages 5 and 3, began in Montreal this week. He and his wife, another doctor, had separated shortly before the murders and his failed suicide attempt.
And finally, a husband in Ft. Lauderdale this week was so incensed with the court’s orders that he began beating his estranged wife right in the courtroom before he was tasered by authorities.
The last word, however, goes to grandfather David White in New Zealand whose daughter was murdered by her millionaire husband, Greg Meads. This week Mr. Meads was sentenced to 11 years in prison and ordered to pay $65,000 in compensation to Mr. White, who would now raise his grandchildren. White bitterly remarked: “It’s cheaper to murder your wife than to divorce her.”
Lawdiva aka Georgialee Lang"
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Why its time to elect our Judges (in Canada)
Why it’s time to elect our judges
By Georgialee Lang, canada.com April 28, 2011 8:53 AM Comments (14)
Story
Photos ( 1 )
Georgialee Lang: "The election of judges would raise the public’s awareness of the importance of the judiciary and its role in society."
Canadians like to talk about fixing the criminal justice system, but are we ready for a radical overhaul?
Are we prepared to engage in a vigorous debate about the fundamentals of our justice system, about eschewing the appointment of judges and considering an elected judiciary, in rethinking the way we do justice? A 2007 Canadian poll revealed that 63 per cent of Canadians were in favour of elected judges.
Our appointed judges are forced to wade into highly politicized issues like abortion, euthanasia, polygamy, and the decriminalization of marijuana as litigants challenge the constitutionality of such laws under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Today’s judges are making decisions that should be in the domain of our elected representatives. Do we want a judge in British Columbia rewriting our 121-year-old law banning polygamy? Should an Ontario judge be responsible for the decriminalization of cannabis?
An elected bench would be democratically accountable to the public. Presently the only censure against a trial judge is the Court of Appeal or the Canadian Judicial Council, both institutions that shut out the public. If judges were elected they would undoubtedly be more sensitive to the pulse of the general public and less likely to cling to the ideology of their elite educations.
Elected judges would introduce a transparency to the now-cloistered ritual of judicial appointments, a practice that has been enshrined in Canadian legal history for too long.
The election of judges would also raise the public’s awareness of the importance of the judiciary and its role in society. Citizens who elect their judges may have more confidence in their judges, based on elevated levels of scrutiny from the public and the media. Certainly there would be a greater perception of public legitimacy.
On the other hand, critics of an elected judiciary refer to the “tyranny of the majority” and the possibility of corruption, including the merchandising of votes. A counter to this fear is the glare of the media spotlight that is clearly absent in the appointment of judges.
Japan has achieved a compromise worthy of investigation. In sweeping reforms to its criminal justice system, Japan has adopted a program of elected professional judges and lay judges.
This new model of adjudication consists of three professional full-time judges sitting with six citizen judges who participate as equals in the fact-finding and sentencing of criminals. Three back-up lay judges are also seated in case one or more of the lay judges is unable to continue. Citizen judges are chosen in a manner similar to the selection of Canadian jurors.
Japan has no jury system, so the introduction of the people’s views is an important step to lend credibility to its criminal justice system. While Canada has a tradition of jury trials, the reality is that civil jury trials have priced themselves into extinction and judges without juries hear 90 per cent of Canada’s criminal cases.
Citizen judges are only used in the most serious cases like murder, robbery and other offences that involve death or severe injury. The trials are streamlined so evidence may be heard in a much shorter time.
With extensive cooperation prior to trial between the prosecution and the defence, only the contentious issues are heard. One of the biggest complaints about criminal trials in Canada is the long delay to get them started and the enormous court time required to complete them. A political corruption trial in British Columbia that began with a raid on the legislature ended with a guilty plea after almost eight years in court. The final chapter of this saga saw the taxpayers of British Columbia saddled with the accuseds’ $6 million legal bill.
In a recent Japanese case a panel of nine judges, including six lay judges, convicted and sentenced the driver of a vehicle whose dangerous driving resulted in the death of two innocent victims.
More surprisingly, the panel also convicted the driver’s two passengers for aiding and abetting, by permitting him to drive while in a state of intoxication. The driver received 16 years in prison while the passengers received two years each, although the public prosecutor was asking for eight years.
A preliminary assessment of the effect of lay judges reveals they pronounce more severe sentences on sex offenders, grant probation periods for suspended sentences more often than professional judges alone did, and have garnered fewer appeals of their decisions.
We can create a made-in-Canada justice system to restore pride and trust in our courts.
Georgialee Lang is a Vancouver lawyer and arbitrator named in “Best Lawyers in Canada.” She blogs at lawdiva.wordpress.com. Her website is georgialeelang.com.
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News
By Georgialee Lang, canada.com April 28, 2011 8:53 AM Comments (14)
Story
Photos ( 1 )
Georgialee Lang: "The election of judges would raise the public’s awareness of the importance of the judiciary and its role in society."
Canadians like to talk about fixing the criminal justice system, but are we ready for a radical overhaul?
Are we prepared to engage in a vigorous debate about the fundamentals of our justice system, about eschewing the appointment of judges and considering an elected judiciary, in rethinking the way we do justice? A 2007 Canadian poll revealed that 63 per cent of Canadians were in favour of elected judges.
Our appointed judges are forced to wade into highly politicized issues like abortion, euthanasia, polygamy, and the decriminalization of marijuana as litigants challenge the constitutionality of such laws under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Today’s judges are making decisions that should be in the domain of our elected representatives. Do we want a judge in British Columbia rewriting our 121-year-old law banning polygamy? Should an Ontario judge be responsible for the decriminalization of cannabis?
An elected bench would be democratically accountable to the public. Presently the only censure against a trial judge is the Court of Appeal or the Canadian Judicial Council, both institutions that shut out the public. If judges were elected they would undoubtedly be more sensitive to the pulse of the general public and less likely to cling to the ideology of their elite educations.
Elected judges would introduce a transparency to the now-cloistered ritual of judicial appointments, a practice that has been enshrined in Canadian legal history for too long.
The election of judges would also raise the public’s awareness of the importance of the judiciary and its role in society. Citizens who elect their judges may have more confidence in their judges, based on elevated levels of scrutiny from the public and the media. Certainly there would be a greater perception of public legitimacy.
On the other hand, critics of an elected judiciary refer to the “tyranny of the majority” and the possibility of corruption, including the merchandising of votes. A counter to this fear is the glare of the media spotlight that is clearly absent in the appointment of judges.
Japan has achieved a compromise worthy of investigation. In sweeping reforms to its criminal justice system, Japan has adopted a program of elected professional judges and lay judges.
This new model of adjudication consists of three professional full-time judges sitting with six citizen judges who participate as equals in the fact-finding and sentencing of criminals. Three back-up lay judges are also seated in case one or more of the lay judges is unable to continue. Citizen judges are chosen in a manner similar to the selection of Canadian jurors.
Japan has no jury system, so the introduction of the people’s views is an important step to lend credibility to its criminal justice system. While Canada has a tradition of jury trials, the reality is that civil jury trials have priced themselves into extinction and judges without juries hear 90 per cent of Canada’s criminal cases.
Citizen judges are only used in the most serious cases like murder, robbery and other offences that involve death or severe injury. The trials are streamlined so evidence may be heard in a much shorter time.
With extensive cooperation prior to trial between the prosecution and the defence, only the contentious issues are heard. One of the biggest complaints about criminal trials in Canada is the long delay to get them started and the enormous court time required to complete them. A political corruption trial in British Columbia that began with a raid on the legislature ended with a guilty plea after almost eight years in court. The final chapter of this saga saw the taxpayers of British Columbia saddled with the accuseds’ $6 million legal bill.
In a recent Japanese case a panel of nine judges, including six lay judges, convicted and sentenced the driver of a vehicle whose dangerous driving resulted in the death of two innocent victims.
More surprisingly, the panel also convicted the driver’s two passengers for aiding and abetting, by permitting him to drive while in a state of intoxication. The driver received 16 years in prison while the passengers received two years each, although the public prosecutor was asking for eight years.
A preliminary assessment of the effect of lay judges reveals they pronounce more severe sentences on sex offenders, grant probation periods for suspended sentences more often than professional judges alone did, and have garnered fewer appeals of their decisions.
We can create a made-in-Canada justice system to restore pride and trust in our courts.
Georgialee Lang is a Vancouver lawyer and arbitrator named in “Best Lawyers in Canada.” She blogs at lawdiva.wordpress.com. Her website is georgialeelang.com.
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)