A Plea for Reason
Falls on Deaf Ears

The October 29th Hearing

The next few days I wrote up the following proposal and took it to my lawyer to send it in. He refused. The real reason he refused is unknown but my proposal is highly critical of the opposing attorneys and that violates the rules of the brotherhood to cover each others asses.

During this whole process I never got the opportunitity to make my own arguments in my own words. I feel I have a talent for expressing complex thoughs clearly and I think my arguments here are a work of art. I had even allowed myself to hope that after reading them the judge would be compelled by the power of my reason to alter his decision to something that was at least possible. This didn't happen.

On November 18th the judge simply ruled that the motion to reconsider is DENIED. Did the judge make a good decision? You be the judge.

Dear Judge McGhee,

I have asked my attorney Mr. Imhof to withdraw as my counsel. I feel that it is necessary to make certian arguments in my case that are awkward for attorneys to make due to professional courtesies. However, I can not affort the consequences of not being able to be heard by the Court.

I know it's inconvienient for you when clients represent themselves. However, after three lawyers I don't seem to see where having a lawyer is producing better results than being pro se. Because of the complexity of what I do for a living it has been difficult to teach a lawyer enough computer technology to ask the right questions at trial. This became a handicap for me. It's much easier to confuse an issue than to explain it.

I know what the rules are. I've studied the law extensively over the last two years. I have quite a bit of experiance at it now as compared to most ametures and I ask you to not prejudge me because I choose to represent myself and to make a decision based on the merits of my own arguments. In fact, I think you'll be pleasently surprised by the strength and professionalism of my logic.

I have had this property settlement proposal reviewed by two other attorneys and both of them consider my arguments to be excellent. Both have said I should go to law school and become a lawyer. You'll not find anything improper about my proposal and I'm not raising any new issues or presenting any new evidence that wasn't presented at trial.

I want to bring this divorce to a conclusion and not have to go through appeals or bankruptcy. But I need a decision that is at least possible. I'm sure you're tired of me too and I urge you to take advantage of this opportunity to get rid of me.

Sincerely,

Marc Perkel * Respondent

I understand that the mountain of information was confusing to anyone. I'm confused by it myself. This case is really much simpler than presented and what I want to do here is to make this as easy as possible. A decision that will work for both my ex-wife and I. I do require something that's at least possible.

At trial they overstated my assets by a factor of 10 to 1. If you add the $750,000 to the inflated inventory and everything else they said I have then I'd be a millionaire. My true net worth is about 1/10 of what they say it is. From your perspective you made a decision that was 3/4 in my favor and then split what was left. However, it still comes to a decision that is in excess of 100% of what I really have.

Perhaps Wear and Sharp have a winning formula here. If they overstate their opponents income by a factor of 10 to 1 and end up getting a Judge to believe a figure of 2 to 1, they still get 100% of the assets. When complex technical issues are involved, it's even easier to confuse someone. The mathematics are such that I have to get to 80% in my favor to just lose 100% of everything I own.

I know that you were thinking of me from a tax perspective with the maintenance order, and I appreciate that. With my house as collateral on the loan I couldn't borrow against it nor sell my house. And even though Vicki is supposed to get the debt on the land, the bank still has my name on it and doesn't intend to release me from that obligation.

In theory, Vicki could sell the land and use the money to pay off her debt. If she did that it would solve several problems, but my house would still be tied up for up to 13 years if the buyer just assumed the loan.

Selling the land is not what she intends to do. She plans to build a spiritual retreat there in spite of the fact she has no income. There's nothing in the judgement that says that if I had the money to give her that she would use the money to pay off the debt on the land and free up my house as opposed to giving the money to her associates for religious purposes. My house would be tied up as collateral for the next 13 years if she or a new buyer made the payments on the note.

My income taxes also include the profits of the company. So when everything is added up I really made about $50,000 a year for the last 2 years and in 1993 made $120,000 which was the sum of both our incomes together for that year.

To further prove my (lack of) income, I bought the house I'm living in in 1982 for $26,000. It took me 12 years to pay it off. I had to borrow $10,000 against my pickup truck this year to pay my lawyer and make Vicki's settlement payments this summer. I also charged $4,000 on my credit card to buy Vicki's daughter a good computer, software, and business clothes for her high school graduation so she could get a good start in life. If I had the vast sums of money they claim I have I wouldn't have to do these things. If I'm a millionaire, where's the millionaire lifestyle?

What makes sense to me is that I get the Fair Grove property along with all the debt. Since I would be getting a total of about $170,000 in debt I should get the assets the debt is against. I would have to because the assets are collateral against the debt. The debt, land, and my house are all tied together.

Although the bank made the loan to both of us, they did it based on my income and my ability to service the debt, not hers. If I were given the properties and the debt I am confident that the bank would release Vicki's obligation from the note. I am also confident that the bank will not release my name off the note if the situation were reversed. Banks require that the borrower demonstrate they have the income to service the note. I do, Vicki doesn't.

Since Vicki chooses not to work it seems logical to me that the court would best serve her needs by taking away her debt rather that giving her assets she can't afford or cash I don't have.

In my lawyer's last motion he pointed out that the division of property is lopsided about $150,000 in Vicki's favor, and that's counting Computer Tyme as marital property. In order to be balanced you would have to shift about $100,000 from her side to my side. I'm not asking for balance. I think you should still make a decision in her favor for practical reasons. The ultimate judgement has to work for both of us and if I left her with debt she couldn't service, that wouldn't be a good judgement either. By taking away debt you would make it so that she could live on a lower monthly income and not have to service a lot of credit card payments.

Vicki also wants a laptop computer which is a Compaq brand (not NEC) that I bought in 1992 for $3800. I had intended to give it to a friends daughter but if she really wants it she can have it. Vicki claims it's worth $4500. It's really worth about $250 now. But if she wants it and I get $4500 credit on my side of the decision I'd be more than happy to let her have it. She already has two computers in the property division.

Therefore, what I'm asking is that the court allow me to keep the properties and farm equipment and give me all the debt. By all the debt what I mean is the credit cards and her attorney's fees. I'd rather not have to pay all her debt, but if that's what it will take to close the deal I'll do it. This still gives Vicki a lot more that her fair share and creates a situation that is workable for both of us. I will still be buried in debt, but at least the payments will be something I should be able to handle. And Vicki will be leaving the marriage with a lot more than she came in with. Hopefully once this is concluded I'll be able to figure out some way to earn enough of a living to service this debt.

This settlement offer is just like my last offer except that I am now offering to pay her credit card debt and her reasonable attorney's fees. Since this debt was created after the divorce was filed, I consider it to be almost $40,000 in non-marital debt.

What I'm asking is different from your decision in that it drops the $60,000 and the $12,000 in maintenance and I would get the Fair Grove property and the $81,000 debt. I would remove her name from the note so she would have no liability. I would also be taking on all her credit card debt. What I'm offering is $40,000 more than I offered in my proposed property settlement and is $68,000 less than the judgement.

Of Vicki's debt is $18,000 of attorney's fees. If I'm assigned the debt, if possible, I would like an order that would allow me to challenge this figure before either a circuit court or using the Missouri Bar for fee arbitration.

Mr. Sharp complains that he had to garnish my checking account when in fact he would attach my checking account before the payment was due. This gave him the opportunity to complain about it at trial so as to justify his fee. The only time I really got behind was when I left the garnishment in place and mistakenly assumed that the amount would be deducted every month. And I managed to stay current in spite of their efforts to deplete my cash flow by not signing the renewal papers on my SBA loan.

Mr. Sharp indicated that it was because of my self representation that the legal fees were so high. This isn't the case. You'll notice that most all his expenses were times when I was represented by counsel. His fees are so high because he's billing for the time of as many as 5 lawyers who are all conferring at their offices about the case.

Wear and Sharp refused all attempts from me to even attempt a negotiated settlement. It took them 6 months before they turned in their first set of interrogatories. Even after judgement they refused to negotiate terms for payment. There's also about $1800 in late charges on their bill. If possible I ask that this bill be knocked down to a reasonable figure.

This isn't a situation where I'm abandoning a housewife and 4 starving children. Vicki was the chief assistant to the Attorney General of Arkansas, types 115 words a minute, has advanced computer skills, and claims to be the co-creator of my software company. This is the kind of person who should be able to get a good job even in Springfield. Any time Vicki should decide she wants to go to work she could find a job in less than a day, a good job in less than a week.

Should I have lose everything to support someone who chooses to not work? Should I have to be in debt for 10 years to pay for a 5 year relationship? I don't think that's what the laws intend. If the laws are interpreted in a way that punishes a person for being a good spouse and providing for their families, then good people should stop getting married.

If Vicki had worked for the last 2 1/2 years I would not have had to pay her separate maintenance, she would not have run up $20,000 in credit card debt or $18,000 in legal fees. She would have been able to afford her own medical and car insurance and she would have been able to pay her half of the Fair Grove land payment to justify her half of the equity in it. I would ask the court this question: If I hadn't worked for the last 2 1/2 years and she had a job, would the court make the same awards in my favor?

During the time we were separated I made all the payments on the Fair Grove property and had to pay 50% of my income to her in maintenance. The maintenance was to high because they overstated my income to a previous judge who appeared to have split the difference.

The way I see it is I paid for that property out of my half of "our" money that I had to earn. I also bought the tractors and paid for all the improvements. It seems to me that the property should be mine. In the division of property the law allows that the contribution of each spouse to be considered in determining what's equitable.

Vicki has gotten a 2 1/2 year all expense paid vacation out of this divorce. I myself have never had a two week vacation in my entire life. At $24,000 a year that vacation is worth $60,000.

And lastly, the reason I have Vicki's picture on the cover of my software manual with me was and act of romance. We had just got married. It wasn't intended to be construed as a corporate stock transfer. In the dedication page, the statement, "To my tweetie ..." was not intended to be interpreted that a "Tweetie" is an officer of Computer Tyme Inc.

One way to determine if you believe me or them is to look at the evidence in front of you. Does the evidence I present look more credible than the evidence they present?

My strongest evidence as to my income is my tax return. My tax return was prepared by my CPA who testified in court about the details of how he prepared these returns. In his testimony he addressed the issue of my writing personal checks and said he calculated them and the company profits into my income. My tax returns indicate my real total income from all sources. I ask you to believe my tax returns on the basis of the integrity of my CPA who testified before you.

My suggestions for property division were practical divisions that gave my wife more than her share because I knew she didn't have the money to afford a fair division. I'm offering her about $75,000 more than what I think is a fair settlement.

I'll be taking on about $35,000 to $40,000 of Vicki's debt that she accumulated since she filed for divorce. I'll be paying her debts for longer than the time we were married. At any point that Vicki decides to go back to work she will be starting out debt free and I'll still be paying off her bills for many years to come.

Their division of property demanded a cash settlement of $400,000 as if I had that kind of money sitting around and could just write them a check. They didn't even provide an option for me to pay out the $400,000 in payments. Do I seem to you to have enough income to pay them $10,000 a month for 4 years? When someone isn't reasonable, how can they be believable?

Mr. Sharp still insists that my software copyrights have a value of $750,000. Mr. Sharp still insists Computer Tyme is worth many times more than his own expert witness says it is. Mr. Sharp claims Vicki's picture on the software manual proves his client owns corporate stock. Does this make Mr. Sharp believable in the eyes of the court?

We all know that a lawyer best serves his client if the lawyer can bring a conflict to a resolution, even if a lawy might make more money by dragging the conflict out through appeal. What good is it for his client if he gets a judgement that I can't pay. I think that it's only logical to assume that a workable solution is in the best interest of everyone involved. I'm sure that Mr. Sharp would agree with me on this point.

I therefore offer this challenge to Mr. Sharp that as a test of his personal integrity against my personal integrity, as a test of honor. To prove to the Judge who is telling the truth and allow the Judge to compare my credibility against the credibility of my opponent I challenge Mr. Sharp to respond with a property settlement that is more fair and more practical than my property settlement.

I have presented my best workable solution taking into account the needs and conditions of everyone and offered a settlement that is more than fair giving his client a lot more than I am getting. To prove to the Judge that you, Mr. Sharp, are a man of honor and meet the high ethical standards as outlined in the Rules of Professional Conduct, I challenge you to accept my solution or propose a solution you consider better that is geared towards resolving this suit in a workable and practical form.

I ask the Judge to accept this challenge as a basis for comparing who sincerely wants to resolve this conflict and who wants to drag this out to get a big fee. Your honor, Mr. Sharp and Mr. Wear have accused me of being unreasonable and they justified their big fee on the basis of my self representation. Let them now prove themselves to be reasonable as I am in their response to my offer.

I categorize settlement offers in three categories; fair, ridiculous, and impossible. Every property settlement that Wear and Sharp have proposed have been impossible. Wear and Sharp are asking for a huge fee. I think that this fee isn't justified unless they can make at least one offer that is at least possible. My offer here is ridiculous in their favor.

Your Honor, I know that you are struggling with the issue of knowing who to believe. I offer that the test of who to believe be made on the basis of who is most willing to be reasonable. I ask that this offer and their response be used as a basis for determining who here is telling you the truth and who is not and your judgement be made on the basis of reasonableness.

Marc Perkel * Respondent