All Articles Tagged "child support"

Right Or Wrong? Judge Bans Ohio Man From Having Anymore Kids Until He Pays $100,000 In Due Child Support For His 4 Kids

May 14th, 2014 - By Victoria Uwumarogie
Share to Twitter Email This
The Lorain County Sherrif's Office

The Lorain County Sherrif’s Office

Back in January of 2013, 35-year-old (at the time) Asim Taylor’s status of being a “deadbeat dad” was such a problem, that Judge James Walther told him that he couldn’t have anymore kids for at least five years until he could prove that he was financially providing for the four children he already had. You see, Asim Taylor owes almost $100,000 in back child support for his four children. According to The Chronicle Telegram online, Taylor was put on probation for this, and a disgusted Judge Walther told him this during his sentence hearing last year (among quite a few other things):

“I put this condition on for one reason and one reason alone, It’s your personal responsibility to pay for these kids.”

It’s unclear if Taylor’s children were being supported in any way by the state, but Walther was tired of him ducking and dodging his financial responsibilities. If he violated this order, Taylor would be put in prison for a year. At the time, Taylor’s lawyer, Doug Merrill, said that such a ruling violated his client’s right to have sex and procreate. He argued that the only way his client could make sure that he doesn’t procreate again is to abstain from sex–again, a violation of his right to engage in intercourse. And if a woman were to get pregnant by him, she would feel pressured to abort the child, which he said would go against Roe v. Wade. He vowed to appeal the ruling. At the time, Taylor was told that if he could prove that he was taking steps to provide for his children financially or that he already had been doing so, the bar would be lifted. But during the ruling, he admitted that he wasn’t: “I take care of my children,” he said. “I just don’t pay them through child support.” Flash forward to a few days ago when an appeals court handled the case. They decided to uphold the ruling from Judge Walther and Judge Carla Moore said this according to the Daily Mail UK:

“Indeed, we have little to go on other than what the trial court said in its journal entries, which is itself limited. We therefore have no choice in this case but to presume the regularity of the community control sanctions and to affirm.”

It also didn’t help for appellate court member Judge Donna Carr that he had a history of not owning up to his responsibilities and has shown a lack of remorse for the whole situation.

“Where, as here, the defendant has demonstrated a long-term refusal to support multiple children by multiple women notwithstanding his ability to work and contribute something for their care, an anti-procreation condition is reasonably related to future criminality. Taylor has here demonstrated that he is not inclined to support any of his children. There is no reason to believe that he would be inclined to support any future children.”

Carr and the rest of the court said the original ruling was not unconstitutional, because similar judgments had been handed out in other places, including a ruling made by Wisconsin’s Supreme Court. Are you smelling a precedent being set? I’m not sure where I stand on this whole situation. On the one hand, it makes sense that if you can’t take care of your children financially, you shouldn’t continue to make more (though many still do). And the ruling is only for five years, giving him enough time to work and start shelling out the dough. However, the control aspect of it–the ruling is called an anti-procreation condition for goodness sake–seems wrong. No, it’s not on the same level as forced sterilization, but still…something about all this rubs me wrong. But what about you? Talk about it.   

When The Checks Stop Rolling In: Matthew Knowles Won’t Have To Pay Child Support For Another 3 Years…Find Out Why

April 24th, 2014 - By Veronica Wells
Share to Twitter Email This
Mathew Knowles' Child Support Payments Reduced By More Than Half

Sources: WENN, Inside Edition

Alexsandra Wright, mother of Matthew Knowles’ three year old son Nixon, is likely not a very happy camper today. For the past couple of months Wright has done interviews with “Inside Edition” and allowed photographers to take pictures of her and Nixon being evicted, all so she can let the world know that millionaire Matthew Knowles hasn’t been paying child support.

Well, that’s partially true. Matthew hasn’t been paying child support…because, as TMZ reports, he “grossly overpaid in the past.” 

Wright has been dragging him in and out of court for months and Knowles had been ordered to pay Wright $12k a month back in February of 2013. But a few weeks ago, he got the judge to reduce it to $2,485 a month when he reported that his income had decreased.

But sources claim that Matthew came back to the judge again, arguing that since he’s been ordered to pay only $2,485 now, he’s been overpaying Wright all along. He was paying the $12k when it should have been the lesser amount.

So how much extra had Knowles paid? Well, it was $110k. And since he’s paid this much in additional child support, the judge agreed to give Matthew credit for the overpay.

This means that Wright won’t be getting anything from Matthew Knowles, in the way of child support, for the next three and a half years. Sources tell TMZ, Wright plans to continue her fight.

There is one last twist in this messy and convoluted story. Since Wright has made it known that she is getting $300 a month in food  stamps, Welfare officials are likely to come after Knowles, sometime this summer.

This story, as we’ve said so many times before is the hottest of messes. It’s just appalling. Matthew had it all and squandered it for a woman who seems to have majored in messiness. Then instead of being a man and being there for his child, Matthew falls back but pays child support, based on his income at the time.Then when he starts making a little less money, he goes back and says he’s been overpaying. It all seems like nickel and dining to me. If you were making enough to contribute $12k at that time, how were you overpaying? That’s what you could afford at that time. I understand getting the amount decreased to match your income but how is it fair to assume that you should be credited for the money you paid when you were making enough to warrant those payments?

And we’ve talked about Alexsandra before. Girl, you had to have some type of inkling that Matthew’s morality meter was just a bit skewed if he was willing to sleep with you while he was still in a very public marriage. So perhaps, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that he’s not gung ho about the idea of throwing money your way for the next eighteen years, now that the two of you, presumably, aren’t sleeping together anymore. So with that in mind, it’s time to activate that backup plan and make sure your son is good. Because honey, the checks ain’t coming in like they used to.

‘I Have No Home:’ Eric Williams Cries Broke & Homeless In Response To Child Support Lawsuit

April 21st, 2014 - By Jazmine Denise Rogers
Share to Twitter Email This
Source: WENN

Source: WENN

 

For nearly a year, we’ve been reporting on Eric Williams’ child support drama. In case you’ve been in the dark for a bit, allow us to catch you up to speed.

Last summer, we told you that a judge issued a warrant for the retired NBA star’s arrest behind his refusal to submit to a DNA test. A woman accused Williams of fathering a child that she gave birth to back in  2011—while he was still living with his estranged wife, former “Basketball Wives” star Jennifer Williams.

By February of this year, the troubled ex-athlete was making headlines again. This time, Williams was being taken to court by the mother of his 13-year-old son, who claimed that he owed nearly $25,000 in unpaid child support. Though a judge ordered that Williams pay his son’s mother the owed amount, she was unable to collect because she was unable to locate him.

After a stint of what the unnamed woman’s attorney has described as “exhaustive” efforts to track Williams down, he’s finally cooperating with the courts—but not in a way that his son’s mother may have been hoping for. According to TMZ, the athlete claims that he has not been present at previous child support hearings because he’s homeless.

“[The]court-ordered citation for me to appear was not delivered to my home address as I have no home,” Eric stated in a recent filing.

As if that weren’t enough, Eric is also claiming he’s so broke that he cannot afford airfare to appear at scheduled court dates or to even hire a lawyer. Currently, he says he’s volunteering at a non-profit organization.

“I’m in the rebuilding stages of my life,” he added.

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

 

Deadbeat Moms? Should Mothers Be Required To Pay Child Support To Their Child’s Father?

April 20th, 2014 - By Brooke Dean
Share to Twitter Email This
deadbeat moms

Shutterstock

As a new mother who recently returned back to work from maternity leave, I have found that I am now a new member of the “mommy club.” I’ve suddenly befriended women who I had nothing in common with before I had my son, and we trade stories of what it means to be a working mother. One mother I recently chatted with lamented about not being able to spend that much time with her boys since she works so much and they live with their father. However, her main complaint was not that their father was now the custodial parent, but that she was now paying him child support.

At first I was taken aback. It’s not every day that you hear of a woman paying child support to a man, unless her name is Brittany Spears and he’s Kevin Federline. But upon further questioning, she did admit that he was paying HER child support when SHE had custody of the boys. Now that he is raising his sons under his roof, he asked her to pay him…and I have to say I think I think it’s only fair.

In our conversation, she said she agreed that boys learn how to be men from their fathers – so when they made the mutual decision for the boys to go with him, there was no issue. Sure, she’d miss seeing them daily, but she made the most of her weekends with them. But she then said she was shocked to receive a child support order in the mail. When she asked her ex-husband why he was seeking child support, he simply said that the same expenses she had when she had custody are now the same ones he’d have to pay – and if he had to help her when she had custody, why shouldn’t she help him now that he had the boys? I was waiting for her rebuttal, but she really didn’t have one.

She makes a very healthy salary while her husband makes a somewhat modest one by comparison. Yet that didn’t stop a judge from ordering him to pay a sizable amount of his income in child support. She could have easily afforded to raise her sons on her own without any assistance from him – but according to her…and the law, fathers should support their children no matter how much money the mother makes. And I agree. Both parties should participate in financially supporting their children. But are the laws skewed to favor women, even if they’re in a very secure financial position to care for their children on their own?

According to the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, only 5% of mothers pay child support compared to 85% of fathers. And it’s been reported that in some cases, even if the father is the custodial parent, he may STILL be ordered to pay child support to the mother if he earns more money than she does – but not the reverse.

So why are we quick to label a man as a deadbeat dad if he doesn’t pay child support, but not the mother who shirks her financial responsibilities? One of the primary reasons I’ve heard is that the mother needs sympathy in the loss of her children and should not have the additional burden of paying child support. But if the mother is found to be unfit as a parent, does that automatically mean she isn’t responsible for supporting her child financially? What if the mother willingly gives up her custodial rights to her child so that the father can raise him, should she be absolved from paying child support as well?

In a perfect world, both parents would be able to work together – outside of the court system – to come to an agreement as it pertains to supporting the child emotionally, spiritually, mentally, physically…and yes, financially. Unfortunately, there seems to be a double standard where child support is concerned, and some men get the short end of the stick. But there are some women who say that it is a father’s job to take care of his children and that a mother shouldn’t have to pay HIM to take care of THEIR child. Personally, I feel court ordered child support should apply the same standards across the board, regardless of sex. If a woman demands it, I feel a man should be able to demand it as well under similar circumstances. After all, we women demand equality – especially when it comes to money – so women should be prepared to support their child(ren) financially no matter who has custody. And if she refuses…well, the term deadbeat would be fitting for her too.

Single Mothers Listen Up: Lauren Lake Answers All Your Paternity/Child Support Questions

April 1st, 2014 - By Brande Victorian
Share to Twitter Email This

Child support is one of those things most people know nothing about unless they need to, and often times it’s unclear just who or what resource can provide the answers you need. Luckily, we have a friend in “Paternity Court” Judge Lauren Lake who sat with us and provided answers to some of the most common paternity/child support questions around, like what’s the penalty for not paying child support and how can you be sure the money you’re paying is actually being used to take care of the child?

Judge Lake also spoke on what rights men have regarding paternity tests and joint/full custody and child support if/when they are proven as the father of a child and offered advice on what co-parenting adults should be doing before they get in these situations to avoid having to go through the courts to handle these matters.

See what Judge Lake had to say about all these things in the video above and check out part 1 of our interview with her here. What do you think?

VH1 And Joseline Hernandez Reportedly Subpoenaed In Stevie J Child Support Case

April 1st, 2014 - By Jazmine Denise Rogers
Share to Twitter Email This
Source: Instagram

Source: Instagram

For months we’ve been updating you on the impending child support lawsuit filed against Steven “Stevie J” Jordan by his ex, Carol Antoinette Bennett. According to Bennett, who mother’s two of Jordan’s children, the “Love & Hip Hop Atlanta” star hasn’t paid child support in 16 years and as a result, owes her over $1 million.

Things are apparently heating up with the upcoming case because according to Radar Online, representatives for Bennett at Project Child Support served quite a few of Jordan’s business associcates—including his wife, Joseline Hernandez, with subpoenas surrounding the case. Individuals and businesses served with the March-issued subpoenas include:

Bad Boy Records/Entertainment, Inc.
Joseline Hernandez
Sony Music Group
VH1 Entertainment
Warner Music Group
Viacom Corp.
Universal Music Group
Raymond ‘Benzino’ Scott
The Kompany (President, Stevie Jordan)
Mona Scott/Monami Entertainment

“Currently, Stevie J owes more than $1 million in court ordered child support and has not made any attempt to enter into a payment plan to bring the child support current and has failed to appear in court,” said Bennett’s rep, Sibrena Stowe Fernandez. “All of the companies that are responsible for most of Stevie J’s current income have been served.”

Fernandez was also sure to indicate that the subpoenas in no way  “represent any wrongdoing by any of the organizations not managed by or under the control of Mr. Jordan.”

Trading Places: Ludacris Demanding Full Custody and Child Support From Daughter’s Mother

February 23rd, 2014 - By Madame Noire
Share to Twitter Email This
ludacris full custody

WENN

In recent developments with rapper Ludacris’s struggles with child support payments, the rapper has decided he’s going to turn the tables on his child’s mother, Tamika, and petition for full custody of his daughter.

TMZ reports in legal documents, Ludacris states he is a “fit and capable” parent and has always been an “active father” to his other daughter from a previous relationship.

In addition, Ludacris is also asking Tamika to now pay him child support.  Tamika was awarded $7K a month after requesting $15K which Ludacris said he was unable to pay due to lost income from the “Fast and Furious 7” movie which was hindered due to actor Paul Walker’s death.

It’s hard to feel sorry for some of these men for the predictable situations they place themselves in. We won’t take anything from Ludacris being a good father, but we will say between creating babies on breaks and blaming unforeseen circumstances for his financial troubles, this whole situation is not a good look.  We admire these rappers trying to take responsibility, but maybe they should think twice before placing themselves in situations where they pro-create with women they don’t have any intentions on being with.  There ARE children growing up in the middle of all of this.

Child support laws are tricky, but we don’t understand the legality behind making a come-up off your pregnancy.  Both parties are responsible for the situations that can occur from having sex with someone, but we don’t understand how a woman can go from living an average lifestyle to balling based off of having someone’s baby.  There are many women who are able to provide a healthy lifestyle for their children on way less than $15K a month.  We hope that everyone involved can come to an understanding so that these children don’t have to be subjected to all this conflict over cash and custody.

Do you think Luda is legit or has a point to prove?

Child Support Troubles Could Land R. Kelly In Jail If He Doesn’t Straighten Up Soon

February 18th, 2014 - By Jazmine Denise Rogers
Share to Twitter Email This
Source: Facebook

Source: Facebook

At the close of 2013, some interesting news began seeping out about R&B crooner Robert “R. Kelly” Kelly owing his ex-wife, “Hollywood Exes” star Andrea Kelly, more than $100,000 in child support. The news was first leaked by the Custodial Support Foundation, who claimed that they were hired by Andrea to go after Robert. The owed amount was quietly paid off and the brewing scandal was swept under the rug—but apparently there’s more to this story.

According to Page Six, Robert and Andrea are still supposed to be heading back and forth to court to iron out details regarding the custody of their children, but Robert has been failing to show up to their scheduled court appearances—including one that was set to take place this past November. As a result, sources say his attorney James Quigley is fearful that the singer may be thrown in jail—especially if he fails to appear in court for the latest court date, which is scheduled for March 27. To make matters worse, not only is Robert still being accused of failing to pay his $20, 833 monthly child support payments, sources say that he can’t even be reached by his attorney.

“The judge was clear in November that he wasn’t happy R. Kelly didn’t show up,” said a source. “His lawyer [James Quigley] is worried the judge could lock Kelly up if he doesn’t show this time, but he can’t reach his client.”

Apparently child support isn’t the only financial responsibility that Robert is failing to uphold. The source adds that he also owes thousands of dollars to his attorney’s firm, as well as the team that worked with him in putting together his “Black Panties” album.

“There’s a line of people Kelly owes money to who worked really hard on his last album,” added the source.

This wouldn’t be the first time Robert’s finances were in shambles. In the past he has racked up millions of dollars in unpaid taxes and even had one of his homes auctioned off.

Follow Jazmine on Twitter @JazmineDenise

Help A Brother Out: Beyoncé’s Half-Brother Living Off Foodstamps

February 15th, 2014 - By Madame Noire
Share to Twitter Email This
matthew knowles owed child support

WENN

Matthew Knowles just can’t seem to catch a break.  Reports allege that he is so far behind on child support payments that the mother of his child, actress Alexsandra Wright is living off the system to survive.

Wright is said to be living on public assistance receiving $300 a month and using a state-issued EBT card to pay for groceries.

TMZ reported in December that Knowles already owed $24K in child support payments.  The website now reports that the amount has risen to $32,135.90.  He blames his failure to pay on clerical errors and not his reputation as a deadbeat.

Knowles may indeed be facing some tough times financially. In 2009, his wife Tina Knowles filed for divorce after reports surfaced he was having an affair with Wright.  Wright soon gave birth to son, Nixon, and after reports revealed Knowles was a positive paternity match, he was ordered to pay child support.

Knowles recent projects include Music World Kids, the label behind acts such as Baby Jamz and Kid’s Rap Radio. In 2011, his biggest client, daughter Beyoncé dropped him as her manager.  She later revealed in an interview with Oprah sometime later that although their personal relationship was full of love, they began butting heads about her career when she turned 20.

‘It took a while for me and my dad to have an understanding.’

‘When I turned 18 and started handling my business more, he went into shock. And we had our issues. I’d say “No” to something, and he’d book it anyway.’

Knowles is set to appear in a Los Angeles court for the matter next Friday.  This behavior isn’t a first for Knowles but something tells us Alexsandra may want to save that acting thing for the weekends and work on getting some full-time employment so she can feed her family.

Ludacris Accuses Baby Mama Tamika Fuller Of Extortion

January 7th, 2014 - By Jazmine Denise Rogers
Share to Twitter Email This
Ludacris

Source: WENN

Unfortunately, it looks like Ludacris’ child support proceedings won’t be nearly as quiet as his new baby mama, Tamika Fuller‘s secret birth last month. Over the weekend we told you that things were already getting pretty ugly between Luda and Tamika on the child support tip because while Luda claims that he only makes $26,000 per month, which would only entitle Tamika to nearly $1,800 in child support, the new mom is calling BS, insisting that the “Splash Waterfalls” rapper makes wayyyy more than that.

In court documents recently recovered by TMZ, Luda is actually accusing Tamika of extortion, claiming that she threatened to go public with news of their new baby if he didn’t purchase a new car for her. In addition to the car, he says Tamika also requested $7,500 for her lawyer’s retainer fee. As a result, in September Luda requested that a judge issue a gag order on Tamika to keep her from talking because he’s “a major celebrity of great notoriety.” Lawyers on behalf of the Atlanta rapper argued that throughout the United States, judges often allow public figures to keep their sexual indiscretions private. This judge, however, wasn’t buying it and denied the gag order request. In other words, Tamika is free to sing like a canary if she so pleases.

The baby isn’t even a month old yet and things are already über messy! Something tells me that this isn’t the last that we will be hearing about Luda’s child support saga. So as always, we will keep you posted as this story develops.

Follow Jazmine on Twitter @JazmineDenise