one for the good guys

[Bali Hai]

What is the name of your state? NY

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2141118.ece

 

[tuffbrk]

It is incredible that people are allowed to move forward with these kinds of suits - her attny s/b reprimanded for a frivolous suit. Granted, the decision was overturned however - the guy had to take time out of his life, money out of his pocket for a retainer, then more time and $ upfront to file the appeal...the idiotic judge s/b reprimanded and removed and ordered to pay the attny's fees for the appeal...then it really would be one for the good guys!

 

[Bali Hai]

It is incredible that people are allowed to move forward with these kinds of suits - her attny s/b reprimanded for a frivolous suit. Granted, the decision was overturned however - the guy had to take time out of his life, money out of his pocket for a retainer, then more time and $ upfront to file the appeal...the idiotic judge s/b reprimanded and removed and ordered to pay the attny's fees for the appeal...then it really would be one for the good guys!

Yes I agree.

 

[LdiJ]

Well of course that was a ruling that should have been overturned....someone wouldn't succeed in the US either with something like that.

 

[SingleAZdad]

It's crazy that he had to appeal something so rediculous.

 

[Jacon89]

It would've been one thing if she had personally gone to her ex-husband and pleaded with him for support in a bad situation, but going as far as to expect to be legally entitled to a grand sum of money 30 years after a divorce and a hefty settlement, that's ludicrous. Perhaps the worst individual in this case would be the district judge who awarded her the money, in my opinion.

 

[Bali Hai]

It would've been one thing if she had personally gone to her ex-husband and pleaded with him for support in a bad situation, but going as far as to expect to be legally entitled to a grand sum of money 30 years after a divorce and a hefty settlement, that's ludicrous. Perhaps the worst individual in this case would be the district judge who awarded her the money, in my opinion.

I agree, and, the bottom line for all who responded:

LdiJ says that the ruling would be overturned here in the US as well, but, I believe LdiJ doesn't necessarily agree that it should be overturned.

 

[LdiJ]

I agree, and, the bottom line for all who responded:

LdiJ says that the ruling would be overturned here in the US as well, but, I believe LdiJ doesn't necessarily agree that it should be overturned.

Bali...pound sand....OF COURSE it should have been overturned. It was a ridiculous ruling.

However, I can tell you of another case that would total your ideas about these issues.

Husband and wife jointly own a business. Technically the ownership was 20% wife 80% husband....it was a corporation.

This was disputed during the divorce process as they both equally contributed to the success of the business. That's honestly true...I worked for them.

At the time of the divorce husband claimed that the business was worth 60 million, and the wife was entitled to 20%, and the wife insisted that the business was worth 120 million and that it was 50/50. The judge ruled in the wife's favor. She got the business and he got 60 million.

Less than 10 years later she sold the business for 600 million.

He attempted to sue...and she threw him 20 million. I know this is true because I worked for these people and it was a major media event. However there was no way in the world that a court would have given him squat...it was pure charity on her part.....and in my opinion he didn't deserve squat.

 

[Bali Hai]

Bali...pound sand....OF COURSE it should have been overturned. It was a ridiculous ruling.

However, I can tell you of another case that would total your ideas about these issues.

Husband and wife jointly own a business. Technically the ownership was 20% wife 80% husband....it was a corporation.

This was disputed during the divorce process as they both equally contributed to the success of the business. That's honestly true...I worked for them.

At the time of the divorce husband claimed that the business was worth 60 million, and the wife was entitled to 20%, and the wife insisted that the business was worth 120 million and that it was 50/50. The judge ruled in the wife's favor. She got the business and he got 60 million.

Less than 10 years later she sold the business for 600 million.

He attempted to sue...and she threw him 20 million. I know this is true because I worked for these people and it was a major media event. However there was no way in the world that a court would have given him squat...it was pure charity on her part.....and in my opinion he didn't deserve squat.

If she had 20% interest in the business, why did she get half the value of the business and get to keep the business on top of that??

 

[LdiJ]

If she had 20% interest in the business, why did she get half the value of the business and get to keep the business on top of that??

Bali, I don't think that you read well what I wrote. She got the business, and HE got 60 million....cash.

Because the judge agreed that the two of them had contributed equally to the business (and it was formed during the marriage) and he valued it at 60 million, and she valued it at 120 million.

Do the math Bali.....He got 100% of what he said the business was worth. She got the business that he said was worth only 60 million.

 

[Bali Hai]

Bali, I don't think that you read well what I wrote. She got the business, and HE got 60 million....cash.

Because the judge agreed that the two of them had contributed equally to the business (and it was formed during the marriage) and he valued it at 60 million, and she valued it at 120 million.

Do the math Bali.....He got 100% of what he said the business was worth. She got the business that he said was worth only 60 million.

In other words the judge screwed him over. Do you think that is the right thing for a judge to do?

The judge should have ordered that the business be audited and valued by a CPA before making a boneheaded decision like that!

 

[fairisfair]

In other words the judge screwed him over. Do you think that is the right thing for a judge to do?

The judge should have ordered that the business be audited and valued by a CPA before making a boneheaded decision like that!

oh pffffft. he got what he said the entire thing was worth. Oh, ooppppps!!! You mean HE LIED???? karma, bali, karmmmmmmmmmma.

 

[Bali Hai]

oh pffffft. he got what he said the entire thing was worth. Oh, ooppppps!!! You mean HE LIED???? karma, bali, karmmmmmmmmmma.

Of course he will value the business low and she will value it high. Judges know this. The judge could have split the difference and given her 90 million and given him the business.

I really don't understand why you women get your jollies watching these jackass courts screw men over. Courts are supposed to be FAIR fair. There was nothing fair about what that jerk judge did. The judge thought the man was lying so the man got it shoved in his @ss. And of course as usual the woman got the better deal because the man was a scoundrel. BULLSH!T!!

 

[fairisfair]

Of course he will value the business low and she will value it high. Judges know this. The judge could have split the difference and given her 90 million and given him the business.

I really don't understand why you women get your jollies watching these jackass courts screw men over. Courts are supposed to be FAIR fair. There was nothing fair about what that jerk judge did. The judge thought the man was lying so the man got it shoved in his @ss. And of course as usual the woman got the better deal because the man was a scoundrel. BULLSH!T!!

I don't get off on watching courts screw over anyone except liars. Their gender is of no importance to me.

 

[LdiJ]

In other words the judge screwed him over. Do you think that is the right thing for a judge to do?

The judge should have ordered that the business be audited and valued by a CPA before making a boneheaded decision like that!

HIS CPA valued it at 60 million....and HER CPA valued it at 120 million. There were plenty of accountants involved in the whole process.

The judge didn't screw him over, he screwed himself over. He tried to lowball the value of the business and the judge called him on it.