I’ve always said whatever a lawyers writes, another can un-write.
This is the case in Nebraska where a 95 year old farmer has been ordered to pay more in alimony than he brings in per month.
He contested it and the court ruled he still had property he could sell to pay it.
The same property that was in the pre-nup as his assets.
And you wonder why I loathe these black-robed tyrants and thieves.
The Nebraska Supreme Court on Friday upheld a lower court ruling that requires Glenn Binder, of Pawnee City, to pay his former spouse, Laura binder, $3,302.60 month in alimony.
The pair of nonagenarians got married in 1982 while both were in their 60s. Each newlywed had children from previous relationships.
The Binders called it quits last year citing ‘irretrievable’ marriage.
In court filings, Mr Binder has accused Pawnee County District Judge Daniel Bryan Jr of abusing his power by ordering him to make alimony payments that exceed his monthly income.
But the state’s high court ruled against the retired farmer, saying that the alimony amount was appropriate since he still owns more than 200 acres of farmland.
Binder, who currently lives in a mobile home, owned the land before he and Laura Binder tied the knot in 1982, and in divorce proceedings the property worth nearly $560,000 was classified as a premarital asset.
Before Glenn and Laura Binder got married, they signed a prenuptial agreement to keep their premarital assets separate.
According to court documents reviewed by DailyMail.com, the spouses maintained separate checking accounts during their 30-year plus marriage and each paid half of their joint expenses.
Mrs Binder did not work outside the home but helped her husband with his farm and fertilizer business by answering the phone and performing other ‘minimal work’ around the property.
In December 2012, Laura Binder, then in her early 90s, moved into a nursing home after spending two years confined to a wheelchair and relying on her husband to care for her on the farm, according to court documents.
Within 10 months of entering the rest home, Mrs Binder exhausted her personal savings and her husband began paying $3,200 a month for her care.
In the course of their divorce proceedings, Glenn Binder testified that he has paid about $30,000 to the adult care facility and that he had to borrow money from his daughter and son-in-law to make ends meet.
Laura Binder currently has a monthly income of just under $3,000, which consists of her Social Security benefit, a long-term care insurance and a small pension from her previous husband.
She has monthly expenses of more than $6,200, which leaves her with a deficit of $3,200.
But according to Glenn Binder, he is worse off financially than her former spouse, given that his monthly income is under $2,900.
Glenn Binder filed an appeal on the grounds that his alimony was too high and put him below the poverty threshold under the Nebraska Child Support Guidelines, which dictate that a parent of a minor cannot be forced to pay alimony that causes that parent to go into poverty.
But the high court rejected Binder’s legal argument because Glenn and Laura do not have minor children.
State Supreme Court Judge William Connolly also wrote in his opinion that Glenn Binder’s land is not irrelevant when determining the amount of alimony, even that it is a premarital asset.
Binder’s lawyer said his client now can either sell the 222 acres of land he owns, or take out a loan against it to make his monthly alimony payments to his ex-wife.
‘I think the court has given district judges the ability to utilize premarital property to satisfy an alimony obligation,’ Binder’s attorney Claude Berreckman Jr. told the Omaha World-Herald.