The Divorce Papers: A Novel (44 page)
Read The Divorce Papers: A Novel Online
Authors: Susan Rieger
Tags: #Fiction, #Contemporary Women, #Humorous, #Literary
S
ANGER
& B
OOTH
Maria Mather Meiklejohn and Daniel E. Durkheim
New Settlement Offer: Custody & Support
Custody
Physical Custody: sole to Maria Meiklejohn
Legal Custody: joint to Maria Meiklejohn & Daniel Durkheim
Child Support
Daniel Durkheim to pay $60,000/year for seven (7) years (through high school); Maria Meiklejohn to pay school tuition and fees
Daniel Durkheim to pay $18,000/year at end of seven (7) years until Jane’s graduation from college or 23rd birthday, whichever event is earlier
College Costs
Daniel Durkheim to pay college tuition, room, and board for four (4) years
Maria Meiklejohn to pay books and other expenses
Ordinary Alimony or Spousal Support
Daniel Durkheim to pay $60,000/year to Maria Meiklejohn for seven (7) years from signing or terminating event
Terminating events: remarriage; Maria Meiklejohn has a salary of at least $50,000
Rehabilitation Alimony
Daniel Durkheim to pay $30,000/year to Maria Meiklejohn for three (3) years in law school tuition at Mather Law School, or $14,000/year for three (3) years at the University of Narragansett Law School
Terminating event: nonattendance at law school
Reimbursement Alimony
No reimbursement alimony
Medical Insurance
Maria Meiklejohn to pay $3,200 for COBRA account on Daniel Durkheim’s policy
Terminating events: alternative health insurance coverage available from law school or employment
New Offer: Comparison with Counteroffer
| Account | New Annual | Counter Annual |
| Child Support (HS; 7 years) | $60,000 | $72,000 |
| Child Support (college) | $18,000 | $24,000 |
| Alimony | $60,000 | $60,000 |
| Rehabilitation Alimony | $30,000 | $30,000 |
| Reimbursement Alimony | 0 | $10,000 |
October 1, 1999
S
ANGER
& B
OOTH
Maria Mather Meiklejohn and Daniel E. Durkheim
New Settlement Offer: Retirement Funds, Investments & Property
Daniel Durkheim’s TIAA-CREF Retirement Accounts:
$600,000
Counteroffer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $300,000; Maria Meiklejohn to receive $300,000
New Offer: Daniel Durkheim to keep $600,000
Daniel Durkheim’s 401(k) Plan:
$300,000
Counteroffer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $150,000; Maria Meiklejohn to receive $150,000
New Offer: Daniel Durkheim to keep $300,000
Stock Market Investments:
$700,000
Counteroffer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $350,000; Maria Meiklejohn to receive $350,000
New Offer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $100,000; Maria Meiklejohn to receive $600,000
Treasury Bills:
$90,000
Counteroffer: Maria Meiklejohn to receive $45,000; Daniel Durkheim to receive $45,000
New Offer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $90,000
Joint Savings Account:
Originally $80,000; Now $16,000
Counteroffer: Maria Meiklejohn to receive $32,000; Daniel Durkheim to receive $48,000
Equal Division with recognition of Daniel Durkheim’s $16,000 inheritance
New Offer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $16,000
Family Residence:
Current Value: $525,000; Net Equity: $240,000
Counteroffer: Daniel Durkheim to receive $120,000; Maria Meiklejohn to receive $120,000
Maria Meiklejohn to receive her share from stock market investments if house kept by Daniel Durkheim
New Offer: Daniel Durkheim to receive home; Upon sale or at end of 7 years, Maria Meiklejohn to receive $120,000
New Offer: Comparison with Counteroffer
| Account | DD New | MMM New | DD Counter | MMM Counter |
| TIAA-CREF | 600,000 | 0 | 300,000 | 300,000 |
| 401(k) Plan | 300,000 | 0 | 150,000 | 150,000 |
| Stocks | 100,000 | 600,000 | 350,000 | 350,000 |
| T Bills | 90,000 | 0 | 45,000 | 45,000 |
| Savings | 16,000 | 0 | 16,000 | 0 |
| TOTAL | 1,106,000 | 600,000 | 861,000 | 845,000 |
The total amount in retirement funds and savings is $1,706,000. In the original offer, Dr. Durkheim would have received only $16,000 more than Ms. Meiklejohn. Under this offer, Dr. Durkheim would receive $506,000 more than Ms. Meiklejohn, and $245,000 more than under the original offer.
October 1, 1999
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
| From: | Joe Salerno |
| To: | The Firm |
| RE: | Farrow Allerton |
| Date: | October 4, 1999 |
| Attachments: | Notice of Farrow Allerton’s Two New Partners |
Listen up, folks, Farrow Allerton is on the move. Three new women partners in the last month, providing the firm with gender and ethnic cover, not to say talent and brains.
We
should have hired Caroline and Susanna (and of course retained Fiona). I bet we could have gotten them. Who’s in charge of recruitment here, anyway? Anyone? I believe Caroline is Jim Rosental’s sister-in-law. We’re not going to make it in the new century if all we do is cosset the Octopus.
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
| From: | Sophie Diehl |
| To: | David Greaves |
| RE: | The Durkheim Separation Agreement |
| Date: | October 7, 1999 |
| Attachments: | Letter from Mamie Booth, October 1, 1999 |
| | New Durkheim Settlement Offer: Custody & Support |
| | New Durkheim Settlement Offer: Retirement, Investment, Property |
| | Draft Letter to Mamie Booth |
Dr. Durkheim’s new lawyer, Mamie Booth, has put forward a reasonable offer. I met with Ms. Meiklejohn this afternoon, and we came up with a response. Please look it over and let me know what you think. I don’t know that he’ll keep paying alimony and support once Jane has gone to college (always dicey, so Felix tells me), but we should be okay for the next seven years.
Fiona Redux
| From: Sophie Diehl To: Maggie Pfeiffer Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 15:24:19 Subject: Fiona Redux | 10/8/99 3:24 PM |
Dear Maggie,
I was having lunch with two friends from the AG’s office at Golightly’s (always a mistake, I now think), when who should drop by the table, on her way out, but Fiona, all glammed up. She must have gotten a whopping raise; her clothes were beautiful and expensive. Louboutin shoes. Bottega Veneta bag. Great haircut too, not a local job. “Sophie,” she said, “I understand you’re now the lead lawyer on the new Octo-pus bond offering. Just kidding. Please give my best to everyone.” She winked and was gone. My friends looked at me in amazement. I just said, “Inside joke.”
I wonder if she’s going to keep ambushing me every time we run into each other. I wish there was someone at the firm I could talk to about it, but there isn’t. Even Joe has told me to suck it up, though of course he puts it in terms of “knocking Brearley out of me.” At least he’s consistent. He doesn’t mind women behaving badly. David, on the other hand, has trouble with it; he doesn’t like being challenged or crossed by a woman, all the apologies and expressions of regret to the contrary. He wants us to suck it up like men and suck up like women. I may have to tell him one of these days. It’s not a good way to be. So 20th century.
I’m going out for an ice cream.
xoxoxo
Sophie
You Won’t Believe This
| From: Sophie Diehl To: Maggie Pfeiffer Date: Sat, 9 Oct 1999 17:14:16 Subject: You Won’t Believe This | 10/9/99 5:14 PM |
Dear Mags,
You won’t believe this. I just got delivery of two dozen white roses. From Fiona. Isn’t white the sign of a truce? Flowers are never ironic, are they? The thorns don’t appear to be dipped in poison, and the note mentioned “lunch sometime.” I think she was sorry for her jab at Golightly’s the other day. I can’t tell you how much they lifted my spirits.
Speaking of Fiona, her new firm, Farrow Allerton, hired two more women partners, bringing their total to 5, out of 15. Joe sent a caustic memo about it to everyone, partners and associates. David must be steamed. We are falling behind. Maybe Judge Howard was right about Fiona being warped by Traynor, Hand’s patriarchy. I always thought Farrow Allerton was stodgier than THW, but maybe not. They don’t do any criminal work, not even white-collar, which is of course a strike against them, but they do represent several big foundations. What am I doing? Being an idiot, that’s what. As if they might recruit me. I have no experience and no connections in this town. Shoulder to the wheel, Sophie girl.
I think I’ll go cook something; it will make myself feel a productive member of society. Did I say the flowers were from Pettigrew and perfect long-stemmers?
Love and kisses,
Sophie
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
October 11, 1999
Mary Booth
Sanger & Booth
300 Church Street
New Salem, Narragansett 06555
Dear Mamie,
I write on behalf of Maria Meiklejohn. She has asked me to make a counteroffer offsetting some of the skimpier provisions in the new offer your client Dr. Daniel Durkheim has put forward, including: (1) reducing the proposed child support by $12,000 a year; (2) reducing college child support payments by $6,000 a year; (3) cutting all reimbursement alimony ($10,000 a year); (4) imposing college costs in excess of tuition and room and board on Ms. Meiklejohn; (5) postponing payment of Ms. Meiklejohn’s share of the net equity in the family residence for seven years without including future value or paying interest; (6) removing the escalator clauses for alimony and tuition; and (7) retaining all of Dr. Durkheim’s retirement funds.
Ms. Meiklejohn proposes: (1) In return for waiving her interest in the family residence and her share of its current net equity ($120,000), Dr. Durkheim will release to Ms. Meiklejohn the $16,000 in the bank account and pay her $100,000 on the signing of the agreement. The latter amount can be taken from Dr. Durkheim’s proposed share of the stock funds or from another non-retirement (i.e., liquid) source, his choice. (2) Dr. Durkheim will pay all of Jane’s college expenses, including books, fees, and living expenses, as well as tuition, room, and board. Ms. Meiklejohn will pay all of Jane’s school costs until she finishes high school. (3) Dr. Durkheim shall provide and pay for medical insurance for Ms. Meiklejohn as long as she is receiving
alimony. (4) Dr. Durkheim shall purchase life insurance of $740,000 (twice his current income) payable to Ms. Meiklejohn until Jane completes college. The rest of Dr. Durkheim’s offer is accepted with one condition.
Ms. Meiklejohn’s counteroffer is premised on Dr. Durkheim’s agreement, in the event of Ms. Meiklejohn’s death prior to Jane’s 18th birthday, that he and Jane’s maternal grandfather, Bruce Meiklejohn, will share legal custody and that Mr. Meiklejohn will have physical custody, with Jane living with her grandfather on the same terms she lived with her mother. This condition is nonnegotiable and conforms to the recommendation in the evaluation conducted by Dr. Rachel Fischer of the Mather Child Study Center at the request of Jane’s parents. Ms. Meiklejohn will not sign an agreement which doesn’t have this condition; she is prepared to litigate the separation and dissolution if agreement is not possible, and she is prepared to ask the court to appoint legal counsel for Jane. Let me know whether these terms are agreeable to Dr. Durkheim. If so, I will draft the agreement.
Yours,
Anne Sophie Diehl