$150,000 Per Month Paternity Suit
Can you imagine receiving a $150,000 per month, tax free? Karen Sala certainly could and sued Keanu Reeves hoping he would be ordered to pay that tidy sum to her. She was not successful.
A recent article in The Star declares that the paternity case against Keanu Reeves by Sala was dismissed by the Ontario Courts. According to The Star, Justice Graham declared that the allegations against Reeves were "so incredible" that no reasonable judge would accept them. The judge said having a trial would be a waste of limited judicial time.
Karen Sala was seeking $3 million a month in spousal support and $150,000 a month in retroactive child support. She alleged that Reeves was the father of her four adult children.
It is remarkable that she pushed the case this far. DNA tests had been done which indicated that Reeves was not likely the father of the children. DNA tests cannot say with full certainty if somneone is the father but they are accurate 99.9999% of the time. Usually, that's good enough for the judges to dismiss the case as happened in this case.
As Ms A.J. Jakubowska notes in her blog, child support payments in Ontario are not tax deductible for the payor and the recipient does not have to claim them as income. Sala would have been able to pocket $1.8 million dollars per year, tax free, had she won her case.
How is the amount of child support determined?
Child support payments are set in accord with the Federal Child Support Guidelines. For Ms Sala to have received $150,000 per month, she would have had to prove that Reeves' income was about $8.5 million annually. I guess that's possible...
As Ms Jakubowska, a Newmarket family lawyer, notes in her blog, spousal support is tax deductible to the payor and must be claimed as income to the recipient. So, if Sala had been successful, Reeves would have been able to deduct the spousal support from his income but not the child support.
Certainly there is an incentive to sue for child support when the stakes can be this high but DNA tests constitute a mountain too high to overcome. You can't just allege someone is the father of your children these days expect to get away with it. If you are lying, science will prove you wrong. How DNA tests work is a sample of hair from the father, mother and child are analyzed in a lab. The DNA of the child is compared to the DNA of the "alleged" parents to determine if paternity is possible. Courts like the certainty of DNA tests. They normally end the case one way or another.
Ms Sala was tenacious. She persisted in court. She lost. Case closed. Next? .....
I have just gone through a very stressful case in Oshawa which was very probably a lot because of my fault,as I count afford legal counsil, and wanting to care for my children. Her lawyer is forcing my new wife and I,to sell our house of three years. Because there is insufficient equity in the house to get a loan, i also co-signed a student loan for my daughter.I found that the judges refused to listen to any side of my arguments. I was completely frustrated by the Judges and the system, and was walked all over.This case is not about the last three years its about the last 12.
At the time of my seperation from my x-wife I was giving her 1250.00 (CPP)a month which was my only source of income so my present wife, opened up an electrical business which I worked, which was wrong because I was on CPP. My X-wife broke into my new wifes computer, and stole my recievables and took them to her lawyer. between them they blackmailed me into signing an agreement for 1850.00 which I couldn't afford. I also gave the her the matrimonial home as I didn't want my children to have to go through to much upheaval.I had to take what was in the business to pay this.
In 2001 joined a union hall & got off CPP.I worked 269 hrs in 2001, 2002 1600 hrs with no EI as i didn't have enough hrs. I still continued paying her with loans from my mother,cashing what RSP's I had, and my new wifes income.
Prior to the 2000 divorce and proceedings my x-wife, was,I believed was making an effort to become self sufficient as at the time of our seperation was 49 years old. She enrolled in a secretarial course, for which she recieved OSAP.
One week after the court agreement (2000)awarding her 1850.00 a month she quit her course, took out a 20,000 second mortgage, and took a trip to England. Early 2001 she went bankrupt.
My questions are:- (1) can I take her back to court to prove that she did not attempt to become self sufficient or that she deliberately avoided becoming self sufficient.
(2)How far back can I go to reclaim spousal support already paid.
(3) Do I have a chance if I am self reprsented I am Currently on WSIB.and can't afford legal representation and do not qualify for legal aid.
I cannot ask my Mother as she is a widow, and as being her son it would not be right to ask her for any more help.
Is there anyone who can advice me on what to further do.
thanks Dave