Call Email Join Donate
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

“Two and a Half Men” star Jon Cryer and the California Courts

September 2, 2011

On August 31st the Courthouse News Service announced that a California appeals court affirmed the lower court ruling that “Two and a Half Men” star Jon Cryer must keep paying ex-wife actress Sarah Trigger Cryer $8,000 a month in child support, even though the child is in Jon’s custody,

Sarah also had a child with David, her next husband. That marriage ended in divorce after Sarah was arrested for allegedly choking her two-year-old son.

Child Protective Services placed both children with their respective fathers. Subsequently, the Court reduced Sarah’s timeshare to near zero and ordered supervised visitation with her children.

Jon asked the Court to reduce his $120,000 voluntary child support settlement agreement to zero. Jon correctly, but unsuccessfully, argued that the money he paid should be put in a trust account for the child since it appeared Sarah was using it to pay her attorney rather than to support their son .

Later that year the court ordered Jon to pay Sarah $96,000 per year, even though $14,000 and change is California’s child support “Guideline” amount.

The court deviated from the Guideline because; (1) it would be in the “child’s best interest” for the child’s mom to have a place to live in if and when a reunification process occurs, and (2) dad could easily afford to still pay $96,000 which was a pittance compared to his $5.7 million a year salary.

Jon was also ordered to pay $20,000 of Sarah’s attorney fees. He was ordered to pay another $5,000 of her attorney fees after losing a motion for an accounting of monies paid Sarah since nothing in law requires a parent to account for how child support is spent.

After several more hearings, the court maintained it was in the best interests of the child for Sarah to continue receiving support so she would have a home for their son to return to.

Jon appealed.

He lost.

Jon was ordered to pay another $40,000 for Sarah’s attorney fees.

It appears the appeals court very selectively cited and misconstrued certain Family Code sections which supported the lower courts findings while omitting (or ignoring) other sections which supported Jon’s requested outcomes. *

The court basically said “give the poor woman some money, you have more than enough and can easily afford it”.

In the future this appellate opinion may be used to argue that any non custodial parent (especially mothers) should be entitled to the custodial parent’s earnings for no other reason than some unknown time in the future the non custodial parent may have to provide a home for a child.

It might also be used to argue that a deviation from the Guideline is appropriate merely under the child’s best interest because the court has broad discretion and the child should have similar standards of living regardless of which parent is the higher wage earner.

Justice Roger Boren said for the three-judge panel, “The court properly found that special circumstances existed, and its ruling was consistent with the objective of protecting the child’s best interest… understandably, Jon may have found the situation unfair, the primary focus must remain on the child’s well-being, not the parents’ feelings.”

CBS news reported Jon feared Sarah hired a hit man to kill him. She was arrested for child abuse (neglect). It certainly appears Sarah committed serious criminal acts; acts for which an activist court rewarded her thousands of dollars a month in alimony transparently disguised as child support. Jon is charged with no wrongdoing yet has to pay an abusive woman thousands of dollars a month dressed as “best interests of children”.

If and when reunification takes place there will be sufficient advance notice to allow Jon to resume making support payments Until then, Sarah can get a job or two and support herself, which is what Jon would have to do if roles were reversed.

In fact, the court ordered Sarah to find a paycheck besides Jon. I’d be doing volunteer work in the Bahamas if the State gave me $8,000 a month. Get a job? I don’t think so.

Thankfully, if their son is emancipated or reaches the age of majority and never spends more than 4% of his time in the custody of his mother, the court will definitely order Sarah to refund the hundreds of thousands of dollars in child support [sic] Jon wrongfully paid (with interest). Sure, and I have three heads, invented the Internet, and Charley Sheen parties in my storage shed.

Were Jon Sarah and Sarah Jon, Jon would be in jail and Sarah would pay him nothing.

We need to stop rewarding perpetrators because they are women and stop punishing victims because they are men. Is treating people fairly regardless of gender really to much to ask?

And, how about David, Sarah’s other husband? Is he shelling out too, even though he has custody of the son Sarah allegedly choked? How much should she be rewarded for rope burns around the child’s neck?

Here, the Court’s flawed decisions have little to do with a parent’s “feelings”, or the “well-being” of anyone except for misandric feminists, their myopic “politically correct” supporters, maybe Sarah, the high paid attorneys, and a judicial system dependent upon fueling conflict rather than reducing anguish; but certainly not children, fathers, families, or the State of California.


*The appellate court’s “analysis” very selectively cited “some” of policies of FC 4053 (subd. (a),(d),(e), which supported the ordered outcome), but omitted others (subd. (b),(c),(j),(k),(l), which cut against the ordered outcome), and misconstrued one into something other than what it says (FC 4053(f)).

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

30 Responses to “Two and a Half Men” star Jon Cryer and the California Courts

  1. _sen_ on July 10, 2016 at 12:59 AM

    The Boren court, which is comprised of him, Hoffstad, Chavez and Ashmann-Gerst, is corrupt. They don’t care unless it involves government or large institutions like banks, because those people have clout. I had a case before them and in the decision the court’s research attorney (these people do all the legal research for the judges, they essentially write the decisions & judges sign their names on it) took allegation for fact, said fraud/purloined bank documents were okay for plaintiffs to use, misconstrued case law and many many more things. They said it’s okay for six individuals to occupy our property for 8 years without paying rent and furthermore that we needed to pay these bastards $2million dollars for attempting to evict them and for harassing them. At the oral hearing, these judges looked really bored. This is a pathetic, pathetic court…like something you see in Stalinist Russia… the research lawyer writing the decisions for second district, second division is leftist, a feminist, a hater…

  2. Mark on October 30, 2011 at 9:06 AM

    Ok.. lets push for a Federal Law .. for shared parenting. Actions speak oh so very loudly over words. Now when we have returned the issue to parents being responsable for their children no matter what their legal relationship is will we have resolved the problem? Of course we will as there will be NO issue to hide behind, it's a done deal before we even get to court.

  3. Samuel on October 6, 2011 at 3:37 AM

    Thanks for the blog. What is interesting is how important Father's rights is for both Genders. Men just want to love their children and have the right legally to have custody if they want.
    I have tried to express this view on some feminist blogs and my comments get moderated and deleted. They do not even get posted. I even get posted. I thought Feminism meant equality for both genders. On some feminist blogs I have said nothing profane or insulting just the need for men to have equal rights in this issue as well as other issues.
    My comments never make it to posting. They get deleted. It seems these feminist blogs delete anything a man says that contradicts their blog even if it is a cogent argument not hostile. Why are these feminist bloggers so closed minded to men expressing their opinions on these blogs?

  4. jen on September 13, 2011 at 10:29 PM

    Guess what the last couple of weeks the mother n law and wife have been harrassing my brother at work – scaring a co worker when the mother n law was cussing and guess what – they chased after the car my brother was in towards downtown san jose, ca. They call 911 bring a cop with false PC415 out to one location and come to my moms house trying to get my brothers phone number. telling him he needs to go to mediation. Heck no y? they got the restraining order and have been harrassing my brother because they wanted it. In away it does protect my brother. Wife is suppose to be 300 yrds away, but she is out side the gate. oooooohhhh if she was so scared y come to my moms house for material things. go to work. COP IS PISSED this happened. One thing as a woman I do not like games, I do not like people lieing to judges, I do not like bias judges either. Judges need to hear both sides. not one side. What judge tells some one to shut up and only talks about the "TV AND COMPUTER" not the kid. SICK I TELL YOU ! SICK

  5. jen on September 13, 2011 at 10:29 PM

    OH YEAH LADIES PLEASE do not say a father is not in a childs life when you know you party and go out while the husband is at home. LADIES if you are abusing your kids or husband YOU WILL BE CAUGHT !!! WHAT KINDA OF LADY ARE YOU!?
    RESTRAINING ORDERS are a joke my brother went to the court the same day to fill out the restraining order. Wife was there. Remember the same day filed 24 hours later both restraining orders were approved. My brother goes back being honest ask the clerk which one is right. The clerk takes it few minutes comes back and says his wife's is approved because she came in earlier than him. HIS is denied.

  6. jen on September 13, 2011 at 10:27 PM

    well i am a woman and seen both sides. Example couple has three cars – wife has two already. Husband has one for work so he can pay "child support" for hair and nails and party all night! Alimony for spending on lovers. Well guess who got awarded the 3rd car hmmmm. you guest it right the lady! I have a question if your given two cars y would you need a 3rd one. You asked for a money you got it, you asked for money you got it, You asked for money you got it! Hmmm…did i repeat myself. Now if its "FAMILY COURT" what the heck are we even disgusting about material things instead of the well being of the children. SICK I WAS SICK AND EMBARRASSED ABOUT HOW WOMEN DEGRADE MEN! by lieing, manipulating, being revengeful. It made me look at my life and realize would i go that low!

  7. Doug on September 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM

    So, I wrote the governor of California and let him know how I feel about this decision. I told him that California is setting a public example of how juvenile courts are allowed the practice of systematic male bashing and putting the women before the children and that he should be a man and check out I also told him that were he to do something to overturn this ruling, that he would be a hero of men everywhere. Go team!

  8. Doug on September 9, 2011 at 9:11 AM

    We need to pull together as men and make this a civil rights issue. The courts, the judges, the lawyers, the women, none of them will do anything to help us. Why? Because they are PROFITING from it. In the past, a man was guaranteed life, liberty, and property, which included his children (oh no, faux pas!) Well, god darnit, it the gov't is denying me at least 50% of my child's time and 10% of my money — then screw them — they are interfering with my CIVIL RIGHTS!

    • Rog on September 10, 2011 at 4:35 PM

      you are definately on to something here doug i would say that any commitee in govt that doesnt have a male counterpart that recieves half of the budget should be deemed unconstitutional and oh man would that start some fires…

      • jen on September 13, 2011 at 10:33 PM

        let it start fires because you know what as a woman what i see what you men go through even some women go through it too is just sick. the system is sick. IT NEEDS TO GET EXPOSE! MEN STAND UP MEN STAND UP! You will have some women backing you up! STAND UP MEN! ITS TIME!

  9. harry on September 7, 2011 at 3:50 PM


    Thank you for your observations. I agree that angry men keep many people, not just women, from actively supporting men's rights. However, I believe we have reached a turning point where many more people now understand why there are so many angry men. They were not always angry. They were made angry by others, primarily angry misandric women who not only despised men but devoted entire careers to defaming them. I have a hard time not editing some of the vile comments I see on our site. I have deleted a few but even then only after much deliberation with myself. But anger is a valid emotion. However, it does no one any good to continuously vent frustration without offering something constructive in return. If you come back to our site let me assure you that I not only appreciate you sage advice but I look forward to more of the same. We need strong women to help us help others make the world a better place for all of us.

    • JEN on September 13, 2011 at 10:38 PM


  10. @DouglasVann on September 6, 2011 at 5:49 AM

    Can we have some kind of way to voice OUR opinon to the courts?

    • Will_Wallace_LA on September 6, 2011 at 9:43 PM

      If only ………………………………

  11. Robin Cash on September 4, 2011 at 2:16 PM

    I wish the men would stop acting like all women are like that.Me and my husband split our stuff,paid 200.00for a divorce and shared our son. NO child support. If our son needed something we worked together to make him happy. He had no power over us and did not try to play us against each other and we would never use our son to play games with the other parent.I say “Parents Get United” should get some money from all these celebrities that want to join the families who are fighting the courts world wide to keep their kids at all.If anyone is interested contact Robin Cash 720-620-6356. We are uniting parents all over and having weekly meetings to bring down the bad guys. Yippie-ky-yeah MF hahahah

    • Dad Of One on September 4, 2011 at 3:09 PM

      Unfortunately, most women are like that. I have spoken to numerous men who thought that they were going through 'Friendly' divorces, only to wind up with minimal time with their children, and paying a huge portion of their income in alimon…er. Child Support. Especially after they received restraining orders indicating that they had 'threatened' their exes. Unfortunately, nothing happens to women who file malicious false claims of abuse. Therefore, they are in a no lose situation.

    • Will_Wallace_LA on September 6, 2011 at 9:47 PM

      I wish childish females would quit pretending it isn't true that for ALL INTENTS AND PRACTICAL PURPOSES- ALL WOMEN ARE LIKE THAT. Get over yourself if you happen to be the exception. You've achieved all of not being a complete fucking demon.

      • Patty on September 7, 2011 at 11:00 AM

        Oh, please, Will. It's men like you who keep women from actively supporting men's rights. It takes a really strong woman to put up with the hatred of men like you. In the end, some of us wonder it it's worth it. If you want to have women, go on ahead or go marry some foreign robot but please keep your pathetic misogyny to yourself.

    • Patty on September 7, 2011 at 11:02 AM

      You'll never get most of these men to understand that not all women are evil. They don't want to believe that's the case because that means that they might have to examine their part in what went wrong with their lives.

      • jcasetnl on September 8, 2011 at 12:12 AM

        Not all women are evil. That has nothing to do with it. It's called equal and fair application of the law. The reality is 80+% of fathers end up in the non-custodial position, and the vast majority have to pay alimony when it's in the picture. So it's men who this affects the most. Now why is it that men need to "examine their part in what went wrong" but the woman can literally cheat on him with his best friend, get custody of the kids, CS and possibly alimony? I guess she needs all that so she can comfortably "examine her part in what went wrong." Please.

      • @DouglasVann on September 8, 2011 at 9:32 AM

        Why don't you 1) Have your genitals cut at birth 2) Be forced to register for selective service and then 3) have your children legally kidnapped and have to pay ransom for them and then 4) Constantly watch your gender being betrayed as stupid on the media. Then, maybe we'll appreciate your opinon.

      • Omnipitron on September 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM

        I agree with Harry, if you are as fair and equitable as you state then your comments about dealing with hatred really doesn't fit being stated to a man. There are many men who swear to all that is good and holy that women hate men with a passion. When you see all the misandry and absolute ridiculousness that men face, it gets really hard to disagree. Now isn't the time to tell men "What was your part in it." Now is the time to realize that just as Harry has stated, men are angry for a reason and we should find out what that reason is. Robin and yourself used what some call the 'Not All Women Are Like That' dodge, and yes, it is a way to dodge the real issues.

        The reason, as Douglas Van stated, men are vilified in the mainstream media and of course the law now disenfranchises men. You may find this article or the comments here a little upsetting, but you really need to compare that to the crap men are force fed every single day in the Western World. It isn't comparable which is why I take a little umbrage at your position. If you where about men's rights yet you don't wish to enlist due to 'angry men' what is it that you wish from them? To lie down and simply take it? Men became as angry as they are now because they realize that simply stating their grievances will get nothing from women or the powers that be, or they will get attacked for it.

        I'll come right out and say it, by you stating that "You'll never get most of these men to understand that not all women are evil. They don't want to believe that's the case because that means that they might have to examine their part in what went wrong with their lives. " means one thing to more and more men. That the one thing in their lives that went wrong was sharing their lives with a woman. Is that what you want, to further the division between men and women? You can only kick a dog so many times before it realizes that you are an enemy and then it strikes back. Men are beginning to grumble much louder these days and as Harry said, we have every reason to do so.

        We expected fairness in this whole equality thing and got nothing in return. Trying to point out the 'failings' of men who realized just how bad things are simply adds more fuel to the fire. Now is the time to realize that the issue isn't with men. Now is the time to stop blaming men for their very real anger over very real injustices. If you want to assist steming the tide of angry dudes, stop blaming them for it.

    • Type 5 on September 7, 2011 at 3:58 PM

      Hear! Hear! Robin, I stand foursquare behind you in your position that child support is unnecesary and should be eliminated.

      • JEN on September 13, 2011 at 10:43 PM


    • Rog on September 10, 2011 at 4:29 PM

      not only are MOST women like that but they ALL have the option to be like that

    • criolle johnny on September 19, 2011 at 5:45 AM

      … and her name is CASH.

    • Kratch on September 28, 2011 at 12:04 PM

      I'd rather my gender was stereotyped as gold-diggers then rapists, abusers and child molesters. Make you a deal, when you've resolved the issue of society treating all men like the above for the last half century, then you'll have a right to complain. In the meantime, don't come crying that men, who have been villainized by the feminist groups speaking on your behalf, are doing to you what's been done to them for far too long, until you've cleaned up your own house. And before you start crying two wrongs don't make a right, remember that many of the men doing this are the generation who were born and raised having this done to them. Feminism set the precedent of this kind of behavior being acceptable, reinforced by the assertion that women can do no wrong. Don't blame us for learning the lessons taught by those representing your gender in public discourse.

  12. @antimisandry on September 4, 2011 at 10:38 AM

    Disgusting behaviour. Sadly, not surprising. Slowly but surely men will rise up against this attitude that they are there only for monetary purposes.

    • NWOslave on September 10, 2011 at 3:38 PM

      Just another example of women wielding State violence while proclaiming "innocence" of all violence. It must be nice to have an organisation that'll use violence at your fingertips, along with supplying the soap and water to wash the blood off your hands.

  13. Will_Wallace_LA on September 3, 2011 at 11:26 AM

    How much fuck are men going to take before they blow this thing up?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.