Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Jon Cryer

Court CRUSHES Appeal

Pay Your Ex $8k per Month

8/30/2011 7:35 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

Jon Cryer
's efforts to get out of paying child support to his ex-wife -- who temporarily lost custody of their kid -- have been stymied after an appeals court ruled the actor MUST shell out $8,000 per month.

The "Two and a Half Men" actor had been waging the battle for years -- in 2009, Jon filed papers claiming he shouldn't have had to pay a single cent to Sarah Trigger Cryer because back then, she only had custody of their young son 4% of the time.

But, the California Court of Appeal believes lowering Jon's child support obligation could have a negative effect on the child -- and yesterday, it rejected Jon's appeal.

The court explained, "Although, understandably, Jon may have found the situation unfair, the primary focus must remain on the child's well-being, not the parents' feelings."

UPDATE: Since 2009, the courts have increased Sarah's custody rights -- and according to her lawyer, she now has custody of their son for 35% of the time ... and the courts NEVER ruled that she was an unfit parent.

Sarah continues to receive $8,000 per month in child support.



No Avatar


This is a woman who was arrested in 2009 for abusing her other 2 year old with her husband at the time; the child had ropemarks on his neck. But the courst says, she was never dclared an unfit mother? What??? This judge is learly a looney tunes.!!!

1129 days ago


That is just nuts; no kid needs 8k a month. He is probably paying alimony too; tell her to get a job; boo hoo she can't get her nails done as often. And do you honestly think that his son is benefiting from the child support. Mommy probably spending it on the bf.. trust me happens all the time..

1129 days ago


A child is the joint responsibility both parents in all aspects including financial, but for some reason our judicial system seems to think an unfair burden of financial responsibility should be levied on the parent with the greater worth. Absurd! This is one of the worst decisions I have heard of. I hope this decision is appealed.

If the court is honest in their opinion that money determines a child's well-being then why do impoverished parents not receive tax payer funds in a comparable sum? If the child's well-being is all that matters then all parents should receive $100k a child per year.

1129 days ago


OK folks, let's do some basic math. $8K X 12 = $96K/year. 4% of 365 is 350.4. She gets the kid 14.6 days each year. Divide $96K by 14.6 and she spends $6,575 on the kid each day she has him. How's that for the kid's well being. Boy, I'd be really well on $6575/day.

1129 days ago


Love it
men screw women over all the time
this is one of the few ways a woman can completely eff over a man.
You go ex wife Go to Tiffany's and buy yourself something nice.
Eff men in general all players, cheater, and have you seen this guy? She deserves it for ever having sex with this troll.

1129 days ago


The child support industry continues to do this to people. He had his kid pretty much 100% of the time and was still giving his ex 8K a month, now she has gotten more time with the child, so no dice, and she lives scott free of his back.
Every state gets Title 4 funds from the federal goverment based on how much they collect in child support...and that's the reason this system is still in existince. Their goal is to collect as much as possible, putting many in poverty, and when they cant pay they much go to jail.
It's a shady system at best, and while there are men and women who run from their obligations, most do not, and generally are treated like this. Bullcrap

1129 days ago


8 k for 30 percent of the child thats like 24 k a month if she would work but she wont and she doesnt pay taxes on it

1129 days ago


He raises the kid 65% of the time and she basically has him on the weekends and some holidays and he has to pay her $8k a month? FOR WHAT? She's not raising him. She should be paying Jon not the other way around. If she doesn't have at least 50/50 custody then their was obviously something wrong with her. The courts didn't just give her 4% time with the kid and only increase it to 35% without reason.

I'd keep appealing because that is crazy. Hurting the child by not to pay her $8k a month for babysitting her own kid on the weekends. No freaking way.

1129 days ago


There are so many things about these cases that we don't know. I'd be willing to bet that sarah is an extremely nice person, and a very good mother.

1129 days ago

yvonne macnab    

Hey, Charlie Sheen even figured this out. When Brooke relapsed he didn't take away her support. In fact he increased it. He got that his boys love their mother. Even when she doesnt' maybe love herself. They are not suffering because their father is making sure their mom has a life of poverty while when they are with their dad they don't. That is real love. John Cryer, if Charlie Sheen can do this so can you. Thanks judge for actually seeing this from the child's perspective.

1129 days ago


Oh Duckie, once again you get the short end of the stick.

1129 days ago


disgusting golddigger!

1129 days ago


My heart really goes out to Jon Cryer because he's being screwed by someone who doesn't seem to have the wherewithal to be an "attentive" parent unless it's in her financial best interest. The only reason for him to have physical custody of his child 96% of the time is when the mother is constantly working or "physically" incapacitated to the extent that she isn't able properly care for her child. Perhaps he should petition the courts for "full" physical custody on a temporary basis until his ex-wife can get her act together. Hopefully, she'll never have anymore children.

1129 days ago


If she is unable to pay for her child without child support than she should not have a right to that child. It is unfair for one person to provide an income to another because they are unwilling to do so for themselves. The point isn't how much money he has, or what percentage of his income the $8k a month is, the point is that it is his money and he should not have to forgo it so she can sustain her lifestyle if he doesn't want to. Child support laws are ridiculous. The only time support should be paid is when one parent has custody of the child for less then half the time. If one parent has to cover the percentage of time the other doesn't use it only makes sense that they should be compensated for it. This whole system of who makes more, or who has more disposable income is unbelievably unfair and punishes the ambitious and successful, while rewarding the lazy and slothful.

1129 days ago


proof that the guy gets ****** in this sort of deal, no matter the cir****tances.

1129 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web