Rep. Kevin Wallace doesn’t like to pay child support…

Relationships are a lot like political campaigns. They start with a lot of promises that probably won’t be kept, look better on Facebook than in real life, and half the time end with heartbreak and somebody owing a bunch of money. Which is something Representative Kevin Wallace can probably attest to.


OKLAHOMA CITY —A high-ranking House Republican is accused of not paying child support, owing his ex-wife more than $26,000.

According to court documents, Rep. Kevin Wallace hasn’t paid court-ordered child support since a judge ordered it in December 2012. This past fall, his ex-wife, Angela Dee Wallace, filed a lawsuit against Wallace through the Department of Human Services.

The court documents stated Kevin Wallace is supposed to pay Angela Dee Wallace $280 per month for child support. Her lawyer said the lawmaker “has wholly failed and refused to voluntarily comply with said order,” alleging Kevin Wallace owes $20,160 — not including interest — on child support and almost $6,500 for medical expenses.

For someone like me who just became financially stable enough to graduate from boxed wine to twist cap bottled wine, that seems like a lot of money. But for Representative Wallace, a proponent of the Oklahoma gambling scene who also likes to write bills that help his own hunting business, you’d think that $26,000 would be pocket change. So how did he manage to get so behind on payments?

Kevin Wallace released a statement through his lawyer, Rep. Chris Kannady, saying, “The truth is that my ex-wife and I had a verbal agreement back in 2014 that, in lieu of child support, I would contribute substantially to the needs of my children that far exceeded my legal obligation. I paid my monthly child support obligation every month until we reached that alternative agreement. I have paid over $250,000 in support and payments since our divorce more than four years ago. My mistake was trusting our verbal agreement.”

Now, I am not a lawyer and my millennial attention span couldn’t spend more than 60 seconds reading the actual laws in Oklahoma regarding child support. But I did come across a handy guide from the Divorce Law Office in Tulsa, which states that in Oklahoma verbal agreements on child support are not legally binding. If his lawyer, State Representative Chris Kannady, wasn’t too busy worrying about legislating high school football or making the world’s most vague campaign promises to let him know this, Kevin Wallace probably wouldn’t be in this mess.

Seriously, how much does it cost to feed and water a kid? Answer Hayley on Twitter @squirrellygeek

Support Local Media

Help keep The Lost Ogle in business. Join the TLO Membership Club today for only $5 a month!

More The Lost Ogle News

28 Responses

  1. “The court documents stated Kevin Wallace is supposed to pay Angela Dee Wallace $280 per month for child support. ” Not a bad deal for two kids who cost much more than that to raise to adulthood. I would suppose Kevin Wallace’s tax returns do not reflect the cash income from his hunting company, therefore he can plead lack of income when he goes to court. Additionally, the custodial parent probably knows it but cannot prove it.

    1. Yes, I can say he’s getting off pretty easy for payment per month.

      1. +1 I have heard of people paying a lot more.

    2. Well, he’s now making $60k on the books, so he can afford it now.

  2. Words to remember – Never judge a man by what his ex-wife says about him. Is he a dead beat? Maybe. See what the judge says.

    1. He’s an Okla. GOP legislator. Nuf’ said.

    2. But you can pretty much always tell something about him by the way his dog acts around him,….

    3. Huge, you’re never on the right side of anything except the yellow line. Less than three bills a month? He should’ve been paying it and been thrilled it was so little. He’s already shown himself to be an obfuscating sack of marmoset shit in the Legislature. He needs to pony up.

    4. Words to remember; pay your court ordered settlement on time so she doesn’t have anything to say

      1. I had a friend years ago that always paid his a month ahead of time. That way he had leverage if she gave him any problems. He could delay his payment if needed. Seemed to work well for him and in the long run didn’t cost him anything.

        Not a suggestion, just an observation.

  3. Verbal agreements only work when a lobbyist is handing you cash!

    1. Even that is a risky transaction.

      Never forget: An honest politician is one who, when you buy him, he stays bought.

      How many honest legislators does Oklahoma have?

  4. So, he is saying he has paid over $60,000 a year for four years, but he is now upset that a judge has deemed him to be behind by $26,000, or a little over $6,000 a year? Seems like he was only off on his payments by a relatively small amount, 10%, and it should be easy for him to come up with the money if he is able to make payments this large to begin with. Something does not add up here.

    It also seems that the judge disagrees about his contributions “exceeding his legal obligation.”

  5. Fact: He’s a Senator not Rep.

    1. Not a Senator. He’s with the House of Representatives.

  6. Sheeet, if he did pay the $250,000, then it should be really easy to prove it through banking records. That would count as his child support payments, and he has nothing to worry about.

    1. But what if he made the payments in cash, with lobbyist money that he had stuffed in his pockets? What then?

  7. Republican legislators – the gift that keeps giving and giving. Vote em in and enjoy reading about em regularly! Where do they come up with these clowns – oh yeah, same place they came up with the Democrat clowns back in Hobson’s heyday! Speaking of headlines!

  8. This scumbag and his attorney are elected officials and yet they both are clearly attempting to circumvent court ordered child support payments.
    How does this not violate scumbag#1’s and scumbag#2’s oath of office? You know…the part about upholding the laws and constitution of Oklahoma.
    BTW…continued references to the ethical lapses commited by legislators from long ago reflect a lack of intellectual depth.

    1. Re: Your final sentence.

      In addition to a lack of intellectual depth, that rhetorical technique also reflects a condition of being out of rhetorical ammo and resorting to throwing feces instead.

      A shorthand name for it is “whataboutism.” Example: “What about Hillary’s emails?”

  9. Thanks folks – appreciate your critiques! Always like to hear from those that ‘think’ their smart.

    1. *they’re

      1. A big thank you to the grammar police – hope that didn’t detract too much from the gist concerning those who “think” they are smart! You may be really smart!

        1. You do have to admit that it really undercuts your attempt to call the intelligence of others into question when you use incorrect grammar. You might want to consider that they actually are the smarter ones.

  10. good guy in a FU situation..
    walk a mile in his shoes before you judge bitches

    just sayin

    1. I would love to walk a mile in shoes stuffed with lobbyist provided Ben Franklins, must be so rough to be him

    2. Yep, Wallace sure sounds like the victim here. Savvy enough to run a business, a political campaign, and meet with the kind lobbyists of Oklahoma, but not savvy enough to have receipts for money sent to the ex-wife. Right.

    3. silent not stupid? pretty stupid when you dox yourself on a local blog, Mr.H…

      p.s. i never judge bitches

Comments are closed.

We encourage engaging with our content, however we ask that you follow our Comment Policy. Learn more.

Join the Club.

Become a Member

Help keep The Lost Ogle in business. Join the TLO Membership Club today for only $5 a month!

You may also like...