Bizarre, Courts, Lawyering, Politics, Society

Father Loses Job, Seeks Reduction in Child Support So Florida Judge Increases Payments By $300 and Then Recuses Herself for a Conflict

There is a disturbing case out of Orlando, Florida involving a curious ruling on child support. John Nelson is a father who had lost his six-figure salary as a software executive. Nelson secured a lower paying job as a teacher to support himself and pay his child support. He waited a year to get a hearing before Family law Judge Julian Piggotte to reduce his $2200 monthly payments in light of his lower income. Instead, Piggotte increased the payments and left Nelson with just $200 a month to survive. She then recused herself because her husband works with Nelson’s ex-wife at the state attorney’s office.

While it is the best interest of the children that guide these decisions, I fail to see how forcing a father to live on the street advances those interests. The result is often a failure to pay and incarceration. We have seen similar thoughtless decisions in the past, here. This is a father who has found a new job and is working to pay child support. The response of the court appears to disregard the equities and realities of the case. It is particularly disturbing when the recusal follows such a draconian result.

If there is more to this story, I would be interested to learn about it. On its face, it looks pretty bad. I fail to see how a court can leave a man with just $50 a month. I can see if the reduction is only temporary, but it seems like there has to be some appreciation for such financial changes — unless the court viewed Nelson as hiding funds.

If Piggotte believed that she has no discretion in the matter, then state law needs to be changed. If there is discretion (and there usually is) the decision needs to be reexamined due to both the harsh result and the appearance of a conflict.

For the full story, click here.

36 thoughts on “Father Loses Job, Seeks Reduction in Child Support So Florida Judge Increases Payments By $300 and Then Recuses Herself for a Conflict”

  1. I can say the judge acted illegally because it’s illegal to rule PERIOD on a case where there is that much conflict of interest.

    But you ignore that law all you want. Won’t change it.

  2. Actually Buddha, If you go back to the source and read the entry quoted the details are there….from the record. How can you say the Judge acted illegally when YOU do not know the truth. And when it is offered you are to lazy to go and read it. I thought this was a site about equity, law and justice? Not the banker, or the employer, just a woman who took the time to research and stand up for what I feel is right. I did not publish this article here, but I do “gotthatright” to comment. Have a nice day.

  3. TMYK,

    Thank you for showing your response is partially sane and partially nanny nanny boo boo.

    Let’s get this straight: Pointing out a bias and having one are not the same thing, sport.

    Now get a real life. You are Australian if I recall. If you want to be consdescending about national culture that supposedly creates victims of poverty, we can talk about Australia if you like. The conversation starts at “A” for Aborigines if you want to talk about driving people into poverty. Of both sexes. And let’s not forget your past of taking their children.

    The only bias shown is YOURS. FOR THE WOMAN. Courts are supposed to be about facts. Sometimes YOU won’t like the facts. Sometimes the facts won’t favor the woman.

    Too bad. Grow up.

    But if you go in the door LIKE ALL OF YOU NAYSAYERS HAVE assuming that the man is guilty WITHOUT ALL THE FACTS, you commit an injustice.

    This is a blog about law, justice and equity. Not about bashing men (or women). If you want to talk that “men bad/women saints” bullshit?

    Might I suggest Oprah’s site. Because what you are all suggesting isn’t court. It’s theater.

  4. And no spiteful woman has EVER lied or tried to screw over her husband in a venue skewed towards women.

    I don’t care if you know the plaintiffs. You’re not a judge. You’re biased toward one side. That YOU don’t like the man in the case is irrelevant as are your factual assertions absent proof. You know: PROOF. That thing you MUST SHOW IN COURT.

    You weren’t his employer were you? Are you his banker? Do you know his finances in detail?

    No. Neither of you has the total picture.

    imjustsayin & gotthatright, you are obvious neither interest in the TRUTH. You’re all about how bad one side is and how good the other one is and quite frankly there are too many lawyers reading this who have had exposure to family law to buy that load of horseshit. Are there bad husbands? Are there bad wives? Yes. And I’ve got stories too. NONE OF THEM ARE RELEVANT TO THE FACT THIS JUDGE ACTED IMPROPERLY AND ILLEGALLY.

    But thanks for joining the “men bad women saints” crowd. Nice to know that some people just think anyone with the right plumbing should get to keep all the money whether they earned it or not and be able to drive the other into poverty just because they have a penis. Spoiled much?

    If you ladies hate men so much, there is an alternative that doesn’t require you to deal with men. The bad news is is that when it comes to interpersonal relationships, women are just as crazy and malfunctioning and stupid as men. Enjoy.

  5. Pete Moran,

    That is correct. Only the names of the children would not be published.

  6. In Australia, a Family Court issue like this would not allow publication of the parents names in consideration of the privacy of the children. Is that not the case in the USofA?

  7. I am a woman and a person who knows the parties in this case. I find Mr. Nelson’s actions in going to the media and internet with his claim of being a “victim” of a broken system to be despicable. He has given no thought to his children and what impact his actions might have on them.

    Let me first say that I believe there are people who have received unfair results in the family court system around the world. Mr. Nelson is not one of those people. His attempt to be the poster child for this issue is a slap in the face to those who have truly been harmed. The evidence in this case of Mr. Nelson’s ability to pay his child support was overwhelming. You can read a summary of some of the evidence on http://www.glennsacks.com in Sean K. Ahmed’s response to Mr. Franklin’s story about this issue. The judge’s ruling in this case reflected the overwhelming evidence that she heard and obviously, Mr. Nelson did not like it. Mr. Nelson has appealed the judge’s ruling and appears to be trying to influence the decision of the reviewing court by appealing to the public with a story that leaves out much of the truth. His claim that the judge was biased against him because her husband was employed by the same office as his ex-wife is bogus. That office employs hundreds of people in several different locations and the judge’s husband and Mr. Nelson’s ex-wife neither worked together or even knew each other. Mr. Nelson didn’t like the judge’s ruling and now he is trying to ruin her career even though she did exactly what she should have done by listening to and reviewing all of the evidence and issuing a ruling consistent therewith.

    The original story about this case came from WFTV news in Daytona Beach. The reporter did not thoroughly research the evidence in this case, and his reporting of the story was irresponsible journalism. Mr. Nelson claimed that he was only receiving $58 a week as a result of the judge’s order on child support. If that was all he got, how was he able to buy an RV and then travel all over the United States for weeks this summer with his wife and children? Mr. Nelson did not move out of state and away from his children because he wanted to find a better paying job. He moved away because he already owned a home in that state and because he figured it would be harder for the State of Florida to go after him for not paying his child support. The ex-wife has been supporting the children for months now with no financial support from Mr. Nelson. For a year before that, he only paid what he felt like. The ex-wife worked all summer to be able to afford clothes and school supplies for the kids when they returned to Florida, as Mr. Nelson did not pay for any of these items. There is no way that Mr. Nelson only received income of $58 a week as he claims. He just hasn’t disclosed his other sources of income.

    I will never know how the ex-wife continues to treat Mr. Nelson with respect when all he has done to her for years is belittle and degrade her. She never complains to him about his lack of financial support for the children even though it has to be a heavy burden on her. She works five days a week and even after working all day, she has driven the kids several hours to see him at her own expense and in a car that has well over 100,000 miles on it. For all the parents with legitimate claims of unfair treatment in the child support system, do not let this guy try to be your representative. He is not who he claims to be. Pray for his current wife as well as the ex-wife and his children. They are going to need it to have to continue to deal with him and his relentless attacks.

  9. Actually, if you check back to the source article you will find the answers to your questions….seems Mr Nelson has been hiding a few things. First BIL and TMYK, the judge disclosed that her husband worked in an office (with some 400 others) that also employed Mr. Nelsons ex wife. The transcript shows Mr Nelson, his attorney and all others agreed that it had no bearing, accepted and proceeded….He has been going to TV news stations, bloggs etc telling a lie to garner support for his appeal. He is throwing a Judge under the bus after 30 years of service to our community and using the media to pressure his appeal outcome. Oh and for the record, he was flying his plane to his vacation home on weekends, paying his attorneys cash, and claiming he did not have to turn over financial records to delay the case. The whole time he is spending, he cut checks for various amounts but never more than 1/3 of what was ordered. It is as TMYK says only worse…..this guy is using lies about the judge to rally the fathers rights people to his defense….shame on him. PLEASE REREAD THE GLENN SAACKS PAGE IF YOU HAVE INTEREST IN THIS CASE.

  10. Thank you for showing your prejudice, BIL. I guess we both now know where the other stands.

    I will agree with you that she should have immediately recused herself, due to her relation with a person affected by the case, but that’s about all I’ll agree with. Her failure to recuse will probably let this child-support dodging jerkwad off the hook, and that’s too bad. Then we’ll have one more destitute mother and kids in America.

    Who’s counting anymore?

  11. Thanks for showing your prejudice, TMYK.

    And a complete lack of understand of “improper influence” and “proper recusal”.

    She shouldn’t have made a ruling one way or the other PERIOD. Before a single attorney said ANYTHING, she should have excused herself with no opinion rendered. End of story.

    Just like you should have thought before assuming the worst motive possible based solely on gender bias. She’s not fit for the bench. Neither are you making assumptions like that. It has noting to do with gender either, just your flawed logics and biases.

    “Lost his job” is not the same as “quit his job” – especially in THIS economy – and not all fathers think taking care of the kids just takes away from their beer money and whoring around time. I’m having to let a very decent fellow go after the first of the year. Through no fault of his, through no fault of mine, through no fault of the big customer we lost due to a disastrous downturn in their business caused by changes in buying patterns. He’s a good guy who loves his kids and works hard to provide for them. He’s also divorced. Luckily he’s on good terms with his ex. I’m doing my best to keep him on until he can find something else. But if I can’t? He shouldn’t be penalized for losing his job. It wasn’t his fault. It’s nobody’s fault. Sometimes things just happen.

    You know some scumbags? Too bad for you. You attribute their motives to everyone? So sad for you. You miss meeting good people when you assume EVERYONE is a scumbag. This includes men.

    Not all men are beasts and not all women are saints. Most are a little of both.

  12. I see this all the time. My own father did it. Lots of guys do it. Hell, my girlfriend’s ex did the same thing; guy gets hit with a child support order, guy dumps decent job and takes the lowest-paying job he can to “show the bitch she can’t break his balls”.

    Judges aren’t stupid. I’m sure Judge Piggotte sees multiple Mr. Nelsons in her courtroom every day. As far as I’m concerned she made the right ruling, I hope it gets upheld, and maybe Mr. Nelson will think twice before deciding to ruin the lives of his kids – because they, not the ex-wife or Mr. Nelson, are the real victims of Mr. Nelson’s selfish actions.

  13. WOW. Penalized for actually paying child support. That is just totally fkked up. And it sounds like that he wants to continue to pay child support but cannot pay more with the less money that he is earning. I think the judge was more than unfair. I also think there’s something more to the story that is not being told. Sounds like to me that the ex-wife is a vengeful b!tch. There are some women that are like that.

    They should be prosecuting deadbeat dads instead of prosecuting those who are making an effort to support their children. The whole justice system in general is just fkked up. The criminals go free while the innocent and victims get punished, thrown in jail and locked away for life.

  15. She should be reduced to the same amount as he had to live on. Sounds like a hell of a conflict asswipe. At least we know under the Federal verson of the Uniform Support Act no more than 50 per cent can be garnished. Yeah right. Seems like 73 per cent sometimes.

  16. She recused herself one ruling too late. Let’s see what the judicial ethics folks think about this situation. Thank God for appeals.

  19. Jude dredd may have tased him, so its OK she recused herself.. She may have just recused herself of a job!!!

Comments are closed.