By haku4u - 01/04/2013 23:18 - United States - Port Charlotte

Today, I got served paperwork stating that my ex-fiancée is suing me again for child support. About 7 years ago, I proved via DNA testing within the court system that I was not the father the first time. I see a talk show in my future. FML
I agree, your life sucks 45 202
You deserved it 2 922

Same thing different taste

Top comments

yoursucklives 36

she doesn't seem too bright, or she's just a bitch. probably the latter.

perdix 29

Maybe the kid matured and its DNA finally matches yours. That could happen.

Comments

yoursucklives 36

she doesn't seem too bright, or she's just a bitch. probably the latter.

Chucklikesbacon 12
hobo1235 15

She probably wants to get money out of him too

8, Ding! Ding! Ding! This woman is only after his money and thinks that, somehow, there won't be another DNA test. I feel sorry for the child based on how stupid her mother is!

Chucklikesbacon 12

That would propably be the best reason, why she is doing this. Everything else just wouldn't make sense.

Great. Another person trying to do whatever she can to live off of the government or other people rather than do it like all the other strong and independent mothers have done such as my mother of 4 children!

yoursucklives 36

#7 jup, she's a dumb bitch. she only wants to get some money out of it, but i don't think she thought this through, because this makes no sense at all.

@14 I doubt there would even been need of another DNA test it would be in the court records showing that the previous DNA test proved OP wasn't the father. Some people just never learn though.

caysters 12

In some states, if you are the main provider for a kid, even if not biologically yours, and you divorce, the courts can mandate you pay child support. My mom said had she and her ex husband divorced when we were under the age of 18, she could have gone after him for child support had she felt like it, but she isn't that mean, and I was 21 when they split.

uhmaizing 3

i think the best option is to countersue for harassment.

The problem is in some states it doesn't matter. If a man makes one payment on his own, he is stu k whether the kid is his or not. There are a few other conditions too. It falls under what is best for the child. Pretty messed up.

This one is actually very easy. And you don't even need a lawyer. Move for dismissal as the case was already adjudicated. That's it. Just bring the old case number and dismissal paper (if you don't have it, the court will have copies).

bamagrl410 31

The court will probably go through the docket, see the case, and laugh her out of the room. I can't believe she's dumb enough to think they'll overlook a DNA test, not do another one, and not just throw the case out. Some people...

Going without a lawyer doesn't seem like a good idea. The risk for his livelihood is far too high to try and skimp on the lawyer's fee.

I see a higher likelihood that both statements are correct.

I hope she ends up wasting money on lawyers and gets nothing out of it.

perdix 29

Maybe the kid matured and its DNA finally matches yours. That could happen.

iLike2Teabag 27

If that's the case, 7 years from now the Maury show is going to blow up. Return of the ghetto mothers (maybe even grandmas by then).

17, perdix didn't get to become one of the top commenters by being a retard. Or maybe he did, I haven't been around that long myself.

17- I hope you're new here. It's obvious he is. Basically everyone here is joking. I'm just kidding.

perdix 29

The "That could happen" at the end should have been the tip-off that I was trying to sell you a bag of BS.

20 apparently everyone here can be just kidding but only ill be taken seriously...haha

Link5794 18

No, it's just because most of us know what Perdix's comments are like and we recognize the sarcasm.

bamagrl410 31

24 - EVERY single FML I've looked at, your comments have been thumbed down. Please, just slow down and think.

If you want to report me go right ahead, the FML community is quite flippant in it's judging of people's comments, anyone who disagrees with the opinion of a popular fmler is automatically thumbed down, I've been thumbed down multiple times for my blatant sarcasm being taken seriously. Feel free to look at my favorites, most of which have comments of mine that are thumbed up.

Do you still hold on to that bag of BS, perdix? I am in dire need of some!

She's looking for someone to drag down along with her other problems. You proved her wrong the first time and still suing you for child support? She should used the money she's paying her lawyer with for her child.

I take it that's the reason you're no longer together?

zahra_786 19

As soon as I read DNA I thought of Jeremy Kyle, haha. Good luck though OP.

If you’re not the father of her child it should be simple. It’s much more interesting why your former fiancé tries again after 7 years even though she already failed.

You are NOT the father!!! Now take 2 minutes to dance your ass off in the crowd

JocelynKaulitz 28

"You are NOT the father!!" -Maury.

SilentScreamer 12

Just take another test. Easy, but, annoying.

Sue her right back for harassment. I'm not exactly sure how our legal and suing system works, but I know you can make a counterclaim and put out a restraining order. If you know youre not the father you've got nothing to worry about. She's just going to look crazy.

Ooooor he could just bring the results of the previous DNA test to court with him. It's pretty damning evidence I'd think. But yea then a restraining order would be in...order...

Just get copies of the the documents from the previous court case. And counter-sue for harassment. The restraining order is a good idea, as well.

Honestly, even countersuing costs an enormous amount of money, so his life definitely sucks.

He will be in court anyway. But if nothing else, he should look for his legal costs just for the fact she is so stupid.

toalysium 15

If it was already decided in court all he should* have to do is get his lawyer to dismiss it by summary judgment. It's called issue preclusion. *don't know the state so can't be more specific.