theweaselking: (Default)
[personal profile] theweaselking
While acknowledging there are unique problems with determining the reasonable needs of children of high-earning families, the court said trial judges should nevertheless avoid overindulgence -- citing the doctrine of In re Patterson, 920 P.2d 450 (Kan. App. 1996), that "no child, no matter how wealthy the parents, needs to be provided [with] more than three ponies."

"[T]he court made no distinction between what needs were reasonable, given the age of the children, and what simply amounted to a 'fourth pony,'" wrote Parker, who was joined by Judges Rudy Coleman and Thomas Lyons.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:09 pm (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:13 pm (UTC)
jerril: A cartoon head with caucasian skin, brown hair, and glasses. (Default)
From: [personal profile] jerril
Hm. Does that mean that some children need to be provided with two or three ponies?

Where's my pony?

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
No.

But no matter what, the court is not going to order that you be provided with four.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] missysedai.livejournal.com
Although the parties' experts agreed the Strahans' marital standard of living was approximately $1 million a year, Convery found the "reasonable current standard of living" of Jean Strahan and the two children was $630,000 a year, or $52,500 per month.

Oh no, they only have $52.5K a month to live on? Cry me a fucking river.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
Have a heart! That's only two and a half ponies each!

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] chaosrah.livejournal.com
jeez, i don't even know what to say about this... like, wow, he shouldn't have to pay that much, but honestly, does he need as much money as he has? but you know a lot of that money probably goes to the ex wife.. if they want him to pay that much, the kids should be living with him.

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 08:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] katballou.livejournal.com
Those "needs," wrote Appellate Division Judge Lorraine Parker, included the children giving their nanny a 10-day vacation in Jamaica; diamond jewelry for their grandmother; $30,000 yearly for landscaping expenses; $36,000 a year for "equipment and furnishings"; and $3,000 yearly for audio visual equipment. Jean set their clothing needs at $27,000 a year, since the children needed new outfits every time they saw their father and one of them demanded a new purse every time she left the house.


WTF?! The kids won't even be 4 until October.
No 30 year old needs a new purse every time they leave the house and I'll be damned if a 3 year old does.

However if they need a new nanny.....

(no subject)

Date: 2008-08-27 09:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] crazy-alexy.livejournal.com
Maybe they'll need two nannies? I mean, if they need three ponies...

(no subject)

Date: 2008-09-11 03:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] liddle-oldman.livejournal.com
And how, specifically, is one to excel in polo with such a short string? The courts simply don't understand our needs!

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 5th, 2026 02:31 pm