I suspect that if the wife were disabled, or had helped build his business or put him through med school, it would have been mentioned.
Originally Posted by mistoffolees
Working in default real estate, I've seen SOOOO many people who got really bad financial advice from their attorneys, that I don't presume they will always give the best advice. If they did, we wouldn't see day after day of posts about people who "agreed" that the ex would be responsible for the house payment, and now their credit is locked up AND ruined and they are surprised to find they are indeed responsible for the loan.
Example: I know someone who owned a lot of scattered site single family homes when the wife wanted out. The attorney didn't have a clue that it was unwise to liquidate, especially all at once because
A. capital gains, Now she blew through most of the money AND didn't plan for her capital gains taxes. Her attorney gave her bad advice. Their approach was a fiscal disaster, to her anyway. He planned appropriately, but still sold at a bad time, when they could have just divied up the investments..
B. had she taken half the properties (all self sustaining, long term tenants who did their own grass cutting and snow removal) she would have had a long term cash flow
C. If you put them all on the market at the same time, the tenants will all move and you'll end up supporting the debt with little to no income
D. It's stupid to liquidate in a down market if you have cash flow. She was offered her choice of properties, but insisted on cashing everything out.
Attorneys sometimes just take the path of least resistance as does everybody.
If I were facing a major medical decision, I'd want a second professional opinion. I'd want no less if dealing with almost a decade of my life and the prospect of possible lifetime alimony..