Deemer,

If you can use the child support worksheet found here: http://kschildsupportforum.com/kansas-child-support-calculators-and-forms/kansas-2012-child-support-calculator-free!/  fill this out the best you can, and message me.  I'll give you the email address you can send it to.  I'll check it over for any errors.  As far as the alimony goes, I'm not sure, but as far as child support is concerned there is a federal law which mandates the maximum amount that can be taken.  Read this statute: http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_60/Article_23/#60-2310 about KS, then here is info about the federal max: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pol/IM/2001/im-01-06a.htm

Send your sheet with all your children's ages and we'll take a look.

By take home, I mean NET.  After taxes and health insurance.  My gross is right around $1596/week or $6384/month.  Went to court today because I was unemployed for 2 1/2 months and they upped my monthly payment to $4750/month.  So, every week, she gets $1187.50 and I get $112.50. I cant even support myself on $112 a week.  I am beyond frustrated. 

As sad as it sounds and it really does give me a sick feeling, I could actually live with $500/week.  I'm not about hording my income.  I understand the ex needs money to support the kids, but $115/week is absolutley obsurd.  Especially since in allimony alone, she makes $270.75/week. 

Guru, I believe the question was... given the circumstances should He contact an attorney. Unless you are a licensed attorney giving Free legal advice here, which appears to be the case, it would appear from your comments that the answer is Yes with your stated opinion following.

Guru,

I'm sorry. Let me be clear about why I continue to comment on your site that consultation with a licensed attorney is an important consideration.

I think if someone is giving qualified professional advice than it is important to state that so that your readers know what value to place on the information. It is one thing to give and share information which may or may not be helpful to the recipient. It is another to stand up in a Court of Law before a judge on record and take legal responsibility for the consequences (good or bad) of the information. We can say whatever we like in your forum and not have to pay the consequences in a Court of Law or for years afterward. The person taking our words and applying them to their own Legal Case must pay that price.

So do you pester authors on other forums too about offering their opinions?  Why have you chosen to single us out?  There are books available from authors which are not attorneys.  These books give tips on how to be successful in the court room.  Have you written them?

Specifically with regards to an error by the court, the court is at fault, and therefore the judgement would be retroactive back to the original date of the order, not when he caught the error.  I believe we call that the statute of limitations.  If the court ruled in error and cited no reason for the erred judgement, it can be appealed, period.

When I state my opinions, I consider how things really work in the court room and what the impacts will be.  It is illegal to lie in court, right?  Attorneys and parents do it many times every single day in court.  Neither are ever held in contempt for such an infraction even when they are caught red handed.  The court is not going to hold a party in contempt for asking to make an order retroactive.  There is no harm in asking.  Many times with child support, you don't even deal with a judge, you deal with a hearing officer, who is not a judge.  He may or may not know the actual law surrounding the request.  The party making such motion would be well-advised to know the law.  Many attorneys need to look up the laws themselves to make sure.  Why can no one else do that?  They can!

I will agree that for most people, hiring an attorney is a good option.  Legal work is serious business and should only be attempted by those willing to spend the immense effort and time required to learn the laws of the land.  However, if you think real hard about it, why would someone be reading and posting on forums if all they wanted to do was call an attorney?  Shouldn't the question be, "who is a good attorney?"  Then this website would only be a list of attorneys which can be found in the phone book.  Case and point, people want information, opinions, stories, case law, and moral support.  That comes free here.

I will add this - attorneys are salespersons just like all others.  Some are honest, others are crooked.  I have heard many times of an attorney promising the world in the free consultation, but once the retainer comes in and the bills start stacking up, the truth comes out that the outcome will be drastically different.  This is when most parties decide to go prose because they are tired of getting the run around.  Usually successful prose parties are of the same intellectual ability as an attorney, if not more so.  An attorney once told me "a pissed off smart attorney on the other side just makes me laugh, a pissed off smart prose on the other side is dangerous."  He said the reason for this is because a prose can actually make more work for him because a prose will spend all of their time on the case, where he cannot.  Nothing angers an attorney more than being beat by a prose.  So hiring an attorney or going prose are both a gamble in the family law court room.  Everyone has to make their own choice.

For all who are considering Pro Se representation, representing yourself in Court, it is my understanding based upon the statistics that the majority of Pro Se litigants do not prevail (win) when the other litigant is represented by an attorney.
There are several reasons for this:
1. An attorney specializing in Family Law knows the Law, the rules of the Courtroom and standard practices or interpretations by each judge and jurisdiction they work in. That is an advantage earned by being there frequently.
2. The Court has specific expectations of attorneys and their ethical obligations to the Court emphasized by the fact that it is their workplace on a daily basis. (whether one chooses to believe they behave ethically or not). Thus, the Court gives greater weight and credibility to an established attorney over a Pro Se litigant. The attorney will have already earned respect and trust from the Court whereas a Pro Se Litigant would be starting from scratch.

The outcome of your case will be determined outside the courtroom in written documents.

3. Regardless of the outcome of the case a Journal Entry must be written and submitted to the Court in writing within a legally predetermined number of days. There is a process determined by Kansas statutes and the Kansas Supreme Court which dictates how this happens. This document becomes your final order. It can vary widely from what either you or the other party believes was said in Court and will still become the official Order if filed with the Court Clerk and date stamped. The Court will assign someone to this task and will not assign a Pro Se litigant to drafting this document. This is a huge disadvantage to a Pro Se litigant. The most a Pro Se litigant can do is attempt to challenge the Journal Entry if it is not what you think happened in Court or was ruled by the judge. Although there are ways to challenge the Journal Entry they become costly and time consuming due to the involvement of the Court Reporter, Transcripts and new hearings. FYI refer to Kansas Supreme Court Rule 170 and K.S.A. 38-2320 and K.S.A. 38-2278.

I have won in Court as a Pro Se litigant more than once and had to spend thousands of dollars in transcripts and attorneys fees to reverse the damage of this hidden reality. I have learned that it is much more expensive to fix a grievous error than to pay an attorney to advocate for you and get it right the first time.

If both parties have attorney representation the party having filed the motion will be assigned to draft the Journal Entry. If one party is Pro Se the attorney of the other party will be assigned to draft the Journal Entry. I do not know what the Court does in the case that both parties are Pro Se.