Child Support
and Spousal Support

Photoshoot 2

Marriage of Gorham

ISSUE: Wife hired Provinziano & Associates because husband lied about his earning ability and claimed that he was fired shortly after filing for divorce.

RESULT: After a court trial, court found that husband was not credible and ordered him to pay lifetime support.

Villa v. Estrada

ISSUE: Ex-wife went to child support authorities claiming that my client had not paid over $70,000 in child support without any supporting documentation.

RESULT: After going to court for my client, child support refused to enforce wife’s case and client ultimately settled for $5,000.00.

Bolton v. Hellman

ISSUE: Ex-wife had filed contempt for failure to pay non-modifiable spousal support from client when he hired Provinziano & Associates after being served while suffering from illness and disability.

RESULT: Contempt dismissed. Case settled for approximately 20% of what he allegedly owed to ex-wife.

Caruso v. Rahman

ISSUE: Wife hired Provinziano & Associates after husband left her with no support and multiple children.

RESULT: After emergency ex parte, court heard the matter and ordered child and spousal support within five days.

Photo  portrait

June Smiling

Marriage of Garza

ISSUE: Wife hired Provinziano & Associates after husband severely beat her for years and then left her with no property or personal possessions.

RESULT: Court ordered lifetime spousal support, half of her retirement for life (valued at $500,000), husband to pay her restitution for replacement of her property and living expenses while fleeing his domestic violence, and husband ordered to pay all debt from marriage.

Larson v. Marchetti

ISSUE: Wife hired Provinziano & Associates to enforce a judgment in her favor from ex-husband in the amount of $90,000.

RESULT: Case settled with payment in full to client in exchange for waiver of attorney’s fees.

Marriage of Mowry

ISSUE: Client hired Provinziano & Associates because on again and off again husband had not paid support to her in ten years despite court order.

RESULT: Court ordered judgment in the amount of $100,000.00 plus statutory interest.

Richter v. Jordon

ISSUE: Client hired Provinziano & Associates because ex-wife had re-married and never told him. Our client had paid support that he never should have for years.

RESULT: Court ordered our client to be reimbursed in an amount over $40,000.00 plus statutory interest.

Inside the office

Kelly v. Watson

ISSUE: Father recently got out of the army and income vastly reduced but support orders did not change and were consuming approximately 90% of his take home pay.

RESULT: Court ordered a modification of support in favor of our client, reducing support obligation to approximately 20% of his pay.

Marriage of Cuoto

ISSUE: Husband had wife that made a substantial amount of money, while he had stayed home to take care of the house and children.

RESULT: Despite husband’s advanced degree, the court held that his being out of the work force for a number of years reduced his earning capacity and awarded him child and spousal support.

Packer v. Nash

ISSUE: Husband agreed to pay $2,000 a month spousal support to wife in judgment, which did not take into account his care for adult children in the marriage.

RESULT: After a court trial, court considered fact that Husband was caring for adult children, and reduced spousal support to $1,000 a month – effectively cutting spousal support in half.

*Party names have been changed to protect client confidentiality. Case results are not a guarantee as to the outcome of a case.