Abba_S

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 995 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2038893
    Abba_S
    Participant

    In my case the husband divorced his wife and had a child support agreement which was garnished from his wages. You are claiming that you can invalidate the divorce and the child support garnishment based on the testimony of a private eye who claims the ex-husband stayed the night. If this were so every deadbeat dad would find a witness for hire to say he stayed over at his ex-wife’s house in order to invalidate the divorce and not have to pay alimony or child support.
    You do realize that in your case you would not be allowed to keep more than $1,000.00 in the bank account otherwise it would be garnished so unless your rent is under $1,000.00 you are going to be having to carry a lot of cash around.
    The creditor is only interested in getting paid. If you send the debtor to jail they wouldn’t collect anything so they will first go to civil court which takes time. by the time they want to prosecute the statute of limitation may have passed.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2038694
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Health Wasn’t it you who asked me doesn’t he have a job house or car. Now if the guy was on a social security how was he able to afford any of those? Unless he’s reired in which case he doesn’t have a job. Otherwise he can’t afford either a house or a car. Also why is anyone sueing someone with only social security there is no way the creditor can collect.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2038669
    Abba_S
    Participant

    It looks like we are talking about two different things I am talking about someone who is earning a decent living, 100K per year legally and paying taxes. You now are saying you are talking about someone on social security, I am not sure if you mean the retirement benefit, disability income benifit or SSI. Which are all garnish proof. The benifits are between $1000.00 – $2,500 per month or $12,000.00 – $30,000.00. Not really much to live on. Even with an off the book job many of which are labor intensive which people getting any of these social security benifit are not in shape to do. But with exception of the retirement benefit you are not allowed to work. If you do work you are committing fraud. The IRS is cracking down on that.
    I don’t have any clients and I still don’t understand what crime was commited that handcuffs are required.
    If you defraud the government they will prosecute you and you will go to jail. But if you defraud a creditor unless it’s an open and shut case, they have higher priority cases and wouldn’t prosecute.
    In my case the husband is allowed to divorce his wife and pay child support , his paperwork is all in order. It’s going to be a hard case to prove fraud.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2038384
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The problem with your idea is that off the books jobs at that income are non-existent. And while in NYS garnishment can be based on gross income the limit is 10% or $10,000.00 based on 100K income while a 25% based on disposable income is $18,750.00 with 100K income and assuming a 25% tax rate.
    I am not sure why you would end up in jail, divorce is legal in the US. Living out of wedlock? It will be laughed out of court.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2038300
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Why is it disgusting? Why is it illegal. Who certifies that this website is kosher?

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2038254
    Abba_S
    Participant

    What legal fees are you talking about that are so high you don’t need a lawyer to get devorced or you can share a lawyer. If it’s a quicky devorce it cost less than $1,000.00. It’s only when the parties fight that it gets expensive. Changing the name on the title of real estate cost less than $100.00 at the county clerk. Garnishment for child support also if you uses the NYState Agency here cost $25.00.
    The basic concept is to incur a garnishment greater than 25% so that the creditor can’t collect anything. Child support can be up to 50% of disposible income and always takes precendent over other claims.
    As far as working off the books most of these jobs pay $30k or less per year. Also rent or mortgage payments are over $1,000 per month and as soon as you put more than $1,000 in the checking account it’s subject to garnishment so how is he going to pay bills.. Also due to the stress the couple may actually get divorced and then working off the books wouldn’t help as the wife knows.
    Anyone thinking of taking this advise should first consult with your accountant who is better able to advise you as he knows your finances.
    You have the option of following my advise and keeping the same job and paying taxes or finding a job off the books that pays the same amount after taxes If your off the books you have to be worried about getting caught by the government, you are locked in to your employer, you are not covered by social security or unemployement. Bankruptcy also may not be the saviour that you maybe wishing for. In this case Kyle knowingly shot 3 people so the debt would not be discharged by bankruptcy. If on the other hand you a licensed driver accidently hit a school bus seriously innjuring a bus load of students he could declare bankruptcy and it would stop the lawsuit and discharge the debt against him and they could only collect from the insurance company.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2037981
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Salary worker making $100K per year happily married with a house and child. He devorces his wife and gives her the house and all assets plus $25K per year for alimony/child support. Which the wife then garnishs from the husband paycheck. The creditor can’t collect from the house or the assests becuase it’s in the wifes name. In this example we will say that payroll tax are 25%. His disposible income is $75K of which 25K is garnished for alimony/ child support. According to the Federal Garnishment Law garnishment is limited to 25% of disposibal income. Since Alimony/child support takes up 33% of the after taxes income the creditor can’t collect. The husban and wife live together in the house although he should have a different address on his government ID and his tax returns.
    After a year or two he should declare bankruptcy under Chapter 7 and he may get rid of the debt. Once the debts gone he can remarry his wife.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2037541
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The concept is fairly simple your business on paper is owned by a trusted confident. Utilities and car leases, mortgage payments and micelanous expenses are paid by the business. in the name of the bussiness. Since all your expenses are being paid by the business you might be able to servive on $14.000.00 walking around money
    I am not advising anyone to go on government programs that they ae not entitled to. That said the chance of getting caught are slim to none.
    The IRS is more likely to catch you because you are for example living a $100,000.00 life style on a $10,000.00 salary. But since nothing on paper is in your name(such as cars, ownership of the business or houses) it will be hard to prove you are actually living that life style. As a general rule the IRS doesn’t audit the poor they usually audit the rich and upper midle class,

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2036945
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Actually a lot of people can use the Garnishment Law. It goes like this the person only declares a weekly salary of $275.00, the balance of his salary is paid off the books. Which is why being self employed in a cash business is needed. Although there are plenty of jobs that pay off the books also. This will also allow you to go on government programs should you want to.
    In Florida your house is totally exempt so if you claim residence there you buy a house there and sell your assets and own it free and clear.
    As far as having equity in car, most cars are leased and those that buy a car, mostly finance the car so if you take the car you are going to have to pay the finance company and the owner if he knows you are going to claim it wouldn’t be making payments so there maybe no equity.
    If you think collecting is so easy speak to Fred Goldman . He got a $33.5 million judgement against OJ Simpson and has only been able to collect about $132,000.00. The amount owed now 25 years later is about $60 million. I am sure he will split it with you, he gets $50 million and you can keep the rest.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2036907
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Kyle is at fault becuase he shot three people and his three victims are at fault becuase they attacked or threaten to attack him. It’s up to the jury to decide.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2036415
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Just for the record there is a Federal Law called the Federal Wage Garnishment Law which clearly states that if you earn less than the poverty level there can be no garnishment. There are exceptions but that only for taxes owed. If you don’t believe me google it.
    Before anyone takes any of these ideas they should consult with both an attorney and a accountant for both tax and legal ramifications.
    OJ Simpson owes the Goldman Estate from 1997 verdict of $33 million, Although he still lifes the high life in a gated community $58 million of which he only paid about $132,000.00. Simpson is making money but Goldman isn’t recieving a dime

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2036410
    Abba_S
    Participant

    2cents A civil case is very likely as 2 people were killed and the third lost alot of muscle in his arm so the estate of the dead men and the still living life one can sue him for damages. Just like there was a lot of conservitives who contributed to Kyle’s defence fund, there are probably a lot of liberals who would contribute to a legal fund to sue the pants off of Kyle Rittenhouse. This is the only way the Liberals can try to punish him and get justice.
    The civil case is all about who is at fault, undoubedtly they are both at fault to some extent. The jury must decide what per centage of fault each participant contributed. If the jury finds Kyle at fault for more than 50% then he must pay that per centage of the damages, but if he is found to be at fault for less then 50% he pays nothing. The jury also determines how much the dsmages are. So they may find kyle at fault for $1.00 and this way make everyone happy.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2036379
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The way it works is you transfer your assets to someone else you trust or to overseas trust in a country that has good secrecy laws. Also you need to be self employeed in an all cash business. If it’s not in your name there is nothing they can do to collect and you claim income under the poverty line so they can’t garnish your wages. OJ is a prime example of how it’s done. You can also declare bankruptcy just to stall them and possibly get rid of the debt. So depending on the state you live in you can keep both your car and house even if you declare bankruptcy.
    You may know theory of how the law works but don’t understand how it works in the real world.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2035982
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The one time I sued was about 25 years ago I was trying to evict a tenant. Every time I went to court it cost me about a thousand dollars. It should be an open and shut case but it was dragging so I decided to settle. The tenant could stay just they would have to pay an extra $200.00 per month in order to renew the lease each month. Their lawyer negotiated it down to $100.00 per month. No more court appearances and the tenant moved out.
    If it a fake case the judge will dismiss the case.
    As far as collecting legal expenses if it’s a private person you are not only not going to collect anything. By the time the case is over he has hidden all of his assets.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2035857
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Does Reb E understand that once Kyle Rittenhouse is found not guilty by the state court he can no longer be found guilty for those murders and likewise unless he is sued in civil court he doesn’t owe anybody anything. Similiarly President Biden doesn’t owe him anything even though he defamed him.
    It’s only after he sues them in court and wins that they will owe him

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2035841
    Abba_S
    Participant

    There are three factors in determining to settle:
    1) Legal expenses even though you have a good case if the amount you will recieve is less then your expenses than you should settle
    2) The chance of you winning your case
    3) The odds that you will collect the award. OJ is a prime example although the Goldman Estate was awarded over $30 million, I doubt they even collected $500,000.00.
    Judges have a number of cases that have to be settled and if each case went to trial there would be a backlog so they try to get the parties to settle. Insurance companies like to settle in the $50-100 thousand range if they can. Media companies have insurance policies but their premiums are going to go up.
    The way a civil suit works is the jury decides how much each party is at fault and then they prorate the damages. In some states if the defendant is found to be responsible for less then 50% he pays nothing

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2035781
    Abba_S
    Participant

    I DON”T UNDERSTAND according to the Torah you can’t pay money to get out of going into exile ie the city of refuge. if you accidently killed someone. But if you intentionally shoot someone and are found innnocent you have to pay?
    Please note I am not saying in secular law, if the estate of his two victims and injured victim want to sue Rittenhouse in civil court they can’t win a monetary award. Of course you know that Kyle Rittenhouse’s mother works as a nurse’s aid which doesn’t pay much. H. His father was an addict and at times they were homeless. Kyle worked odd jobs to support himself and his family. So the only money he may have is for his defence fund. Good luck getting your hands on any of that money.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2035296
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Reb E : It says in the Torah that if a partially married girl is violated she is innocent as she cried out but no one came to help her. But according to you she was in the wrong place at the wrong time and is deserving the death penalty. Also she was negligent at the begining when she left her house even though she was forced at the end, Yet the Torah says she is innocent. How do you reconcile that?
    I also don’t understand your comment “when it comes to money matters”, imploying that Ritterhouse would have to pay montary damages according to Jewish Law. It has been my understanding that according to Jewish Law, if someone commit a Capital Offence such as murder or attempted murder and at the same time incurred a monatary obligation he is obsolved from paying even if he doesn’t get the death penalty. Is there something I am missing?

    in reply to: Justice in the USA #2035288
    Abba_S
    Participant

    After the 2022 elections the Republican will probably take control over both houses of Congress and can look into whatever they want. That is unless they are to buzy impeaching Biden and/or undoing what ever was done in Biden’s first two years.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2035268
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Health: The jury merely stated that he was not guilty of murder, that the state didn’t prove it’s case that he murder the victims beyond a reasonable doubt. Not that it was self defence, A civil case should his victims or their estate decide to sue, will determine who was at fault.
    As far as suing the media like Sandman. While I am not a lawyer it is very hard to win a case against the media. In fact he never won a case. What happen is that it drags on and it cost the defendant thousands of dollars per hour for their lawyers so it’s cheaper to pay the plaintiff $50-100 thosands to settle.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2034053
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Reb E: why was he negligent for carrying a rifle, the medic who he shot was carrying an unkicensed gun. It seems that is how they walk around there. In fact the medic when asked why he was carrying the gun said that he takes his first aid kit and his gun is part of his equipment. Also after the verdict there was a BLM demonstration where a 14 year old girl was pictured carrying an AR15.

    in reply to: 55 cent increase! #2034027
    Abba_S
    Participant

    NO: I think he want the revenue to come from the rich. The problem is that the rich have accountants and Tax ;awyers, so who ends up paying? The middleclass and the working poor.

    in reply to: 55 cent increase! #2034024
    Abba_S
    Participant

    You know they have been nickle and diming you for years. If you travel out of state you can gas up there if it’s cheaper. I used yo gas up in NJ but now it’s the same or more so I don’t bother

    in reply to: 55 cent increase! #2033817
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Don’t worry becuase Biden shut down the the pipeline the US in many places is going to have to import oil from overseas $5-10 a gallon will be the new price. The Dems also want you to buy electric caes. The only problem is it takes 8-12 hours to fully charge the battery,which is fine if you have your own charger and driveway and want to charge over night. Or you can fast charge it and it will only take an hour at what I assume will be the new gas station.
    The next problem is that new houses can no longer be hooked up to natural gas so all future building will use electricity for both heating and cooking. New Electric plants will have to be built and new electric wiring will have to be done. Who do you think is going to be paying for this, What happans in a blackout? No gas power generators as there will be no gas stations

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2033756
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Health: If the media is quoting someone they are protected from libel as they are just reporting the facts. Even if the media libeled someone but retracted the claim prior to trial they can get away with it.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2033470
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Health: Yes he can counter sue and as long as he shows that they were at fault he will win. But they have no money and he will have to pay his lawyer to defend him. As far as the Lib Media is concerned it is very hard to prove libel since he was charged with a crime and there is freedom of the press. He would probably be easier suing the politcians.

    in reply to: Dead Sea #2033451
    Abba_S
    Participant

    GH: Why is Egypt involved they are no where near the Jordan River or the Dead Sea. Connecting the Mediterranean Sea to the Dead Sea would bring millions of gallon of salt water to the Jordan River polluting it so that it couldn’t be used for drinking or agriculture purposes.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2033434
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The next problem for Kyle is the bail money, his former attorney paid the $2 million bail the majority of which the lawyer(s) collected. The lawyer who posted the bail is legally entitled to the bail money. Kyle grew up poor so he has put a claim for that money but so has his ex lawyers. His victims will sue him if he gets the money. It’s doubtful that after legal expenses he will be left with anything so I think he would be better off negotiating with the lawyer for a part of the $2 million bail money.

    in reply to: Trump 2024? #2033412
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Alot will depend how the economy, inflation and covid is in 2023. If the price of gas is $10.00 a gallon becuase progressive want everyone to drive electric cars, I think Biden can’t win and Trump will . I think Trump will only run if he thinks he can win.
    Trump has high negitives but so does Biden. The 2022 election is the key if the Republican take over both Houses of Congress they maybe able to repeal some of the progressive legislation such as rebates for electric cars and building electric (gas) stations all accross the country. For example, it takes 8 – 12 hours to recharge the car’s battery which is fine if you have your own driveway and charging station. If you live in an apartment building you can do a fast charge which will take about an hour but when will you have time. Currently it takes 5-10 minutes to fill up your gas tank. Also they are not allowing new buildings to be heated by natural gas so they are going to be heated by electricity. Electricity unlike gas can’t be stored in large quanitities, which will result in higher prices.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2033072
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The same thing could be said about Pincus, he didn’t have to kill Zimri. Kyle was trying to put out fires, something that the government should have been doing. As far as the AR15, it was on a sling so he couldn’t realy drop it. It was used properly as you can see in the video even though he fell and was kicked in the face he grabed the gun and shot Huaber within seconds even though he was being hit with a skateboard.
    The AR15 is a long gun and was easily seen by his assailants so they knew what they were up against. They took the risk and should suffer the consequences.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2032853
    Abba_S
    Participant

    What this has shown is that we are heading toward a “Mob Rule ” Society. Do you think businesses will want to rebuild or will it be like Newark NJ that burned in the 1960s and they just started to rebuild? All this is going to do is get more people to buy guns.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2032862
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The question is should Rittenhouse brought an AR15 to a BLM demonstration? I saw a picture in Newsweek of a girl 14 years old carrying an AR15 supposedly protecting the BLM demonstrators. If it’s illegal, for anyone under 16 to have a AR15 why wasn’t she arrested oh and by the way her farther was there too.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2032833
    Abba_S
    Participant

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Abba- the prosecuter got him off because the facts kept coming out on his side. His own witnesses couldn’t support his case. You just fell for the propaganda.
    If he had a legal aid lawyer, he would have been in jail for over a year and might have taken a plea deal. Also, I doubt the legal aid lawyer would have challenged the curfew & gun charges. Legal aide lawyer is juggling multiple cases at the same time so it’s doubtful he would have caught on that the medic was pointing a gun when he was shot.
    The jury was deliberating 3.5 days, if it was an open and shut case why did it take so long?
    I am not sure what propaganda I have fell for. When you need surgery do you use your GP or do you get a surgeon?

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2032754
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Amil Zoe
    Well it’s not like Rittenhouse drove there illegally, his mommy brought him, and she must have thought it was ok.
    Actually, he did drive himself there not his mother as he testified in court under oath and he also said he didn’t have a license to drive. I do think that would make it illegal.

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2032541
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The teenager is lucky to be alive and free today .He could have been killed by anyone of his “victims”.
    Likewise if it wasn’t for his lawyers who he couldn’t afford he would be in jail for the rest of his live. There is no way a legal aide lawyer would got him off

    in reply to: Dead Sea #2032327
    Abba_S
    Participant

    AAQ You are aware that there are oil rigs off the Isreali coast.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2032326
    Abba_S
    Participant

    n0 that is the reason the owner of the car lot claimed he never told them to defend the car lot. Becuase he didn’t want the liability for anyone hurt by those protecting the car lot.

    in reply to: Should Rittenhouse have been there. #2032304
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The jury found him innocent so what is the point. It is doubtful anyone is going to sue him esspecially since he doesn’t have money. He should have stayed at the gas station and not gone out alone. But he was young and didn’t think about what could happen esspecially since he had the AR15. That being said he had just as much right to be on the street as anyone else,

    in reply to: Kyle Rittenhouse #2031605
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The DA’s office didn’t put on a good case. They didn’t submit any evidence regarding the curfew. They had no response to the gun charge, once the defence claimed the law only prevented 17 year old from owning a short barrel gun, which the AR15 wasn’t. As far as the rest of the charges the defence was claiming selfdefence all the evidence showed he only shot after he was attacked and with the videos showing what happened it was hard for them to show it wasn’t selfdefence. They tried to say that the pointing of his gun was provocation but I don’t think the jury was buying it.

    in reply to: I have COVID #2030550
    Abba_S
    Participant

    You only have immunity if you have the antibodies. It’s a simple blood test which is free if you live in NYC and call 311.You can find a testing location near you. Take the antibody test every 3-6 months and you will never catch covid

    in reply to: Black Ethiopian Jews #2028252
    Abba_S
    Participant

    They probably converted in the King Solomon era and never married into the general jewish population. They moved back to Africa which explains why they have none of the Jewish genetic markers.

    in reply to: Can a Jew own a gorilla? #2027375
    Abba_S
    Participant

    I think a few years ago there was someone from Ct. that had a pet gorrilla who ripped her face off. In many areas you are not allowed to have “wild animals” so it maybe illegal to have one. Also the owner would be liable for any damage it caused and it may not be covered by your home owner’s insurance policy.

    in reply to: vax mandates just shooting themselves in the leg #2021258
    Abba_S
    Participant

    On 1/6 a group of unarmed civilians protested at the capital. These mandates may result in many law enforcement officers and soldiers losing thier job. The question will be does the government have adequate protection to insure law & order. It is very easy to say you will just replace them but it itakes months to train a replacement. This will result in higher crime rates resulting in businesses closing and people moving resulting in lose of tax revenue, Social programs will have to be cut resulting in riots.

    in reply to: HaToirah Chosa al MeMoinam Shel Yisroel #2020428
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Potatoes like all fruits and vegetables will rot over time so unless you are in the business of buying and selling them, they are a poor investment.

    in reply to: HaToirah Chosa al MeMoinam Shel Yisroel #2020295
    Abba_S
    Participant

    In New York Statw if you posses 5 or more guns and are unlicesensed you can be charged with intent to sell which is a felony. Guns and ammunition is highly regulated and each sale must be reported to the ATF. If your intention is to be a licensed gun dealer then everything is fine but if your plan is to sell them from the back of your trunk that is illegal. As far as selling it to a gun dealer, he wil probably pay you a fraction of what you paid for it. So where is the profit.

    in reply to: HaToirah Chosa al MeMoinam Shel Yisroel #2020024
    Abba_S
    Participant

    I am not sure what is meant by invest in guns and ammunitions. If you mean invest in the companies I think many of them will go bankrupt. If you are saying buying actual guns there are restrictions as to weather you can even own guns in many of the communities where Jews live. Even those communities that allow it there are restrictions as to how many guns you buy. This is besides the hazard of a child or someone else misusing them.

    in reply to: HaToirah Chosa al MeMoinam Shel Yisroel #2019185
    Abba_S
    Participant

    I am not sure I understand the OP. Is he saying that people shouldn’t waste money on vacations in the middle of a pandemic. Who says if he saves this money in a bank or other investment vehicle it will be there when he needs it. Inflation and other market factors can reduce it’s value.
    The money is his to spend it as he sees fit. He can spend it on himself, invest it for the future or give it away to charity.

    in reply to: Macha against men not giving gittin #2014763
    Abba_S
    Participant

    The little I know- The only way to verify the ex is misusing is by having an audit of children support, which the courts will never allow. Leaving the only other proof having the children starving and dressed in rags, in which case she will probably lose custody.
    Divorce is very stressful which can result in hatred and resentment which can transfer to the children. In many cases the children blame the non-custodial parent for all the problems. This can effect how he feels about these children and what relation he will have with them once he no longer needs to pay child support

    in reply to: Macha against men not giving gittin #2014705
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Syag- If the children expenses eat up all your income who pays for your housing clothing and utilities ?Child support requires no documentation so the ex can spend it as she sees fit, for herself and or for the children. The question comes down to is this money considered her money since she can spend it as she sees fit or is it the children’s money since it is suppose to be spent on them. If it’s her money he has a right to complain. If it’s the children’s money and she can’t use it on herself then the father should not complain.

    in reply to: Macha against men not giving gittin #2014613
    Abba_S
    Participant

    Syag – 50% is a rareity but if there are 5 or more children that’s already 35% of their income. This amount is then prorated based on the percentage of thier income. If the wife isn’t working, child support is calculated soley on his income. Then he also has to pay for the children’s medical insurance, plus he maybe forced to pay for childcare so that his ex can go to school or work. Tuition and camp can also be added to this amount. As a general rule it never goes over 50%.
    Note I am not a lawyer and this is for NY State residents only other jurisdictions may calcuate shild support diffrently but it’s based on the parents income.

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 995 total)