Fucking ex-wives!!!

[normiss 768]

Is she SERIOUS??
Lottery!

[skymama 35]

All ex-wives or even ex-girlfriends aren't bad!

But geez, they broke up in 1982? That's stretching it a bit!

She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

[BillyVance 34]

Quote

Is she SERIOUS??
Lottery!

They divorced in 1982!! Give me a fucking break... She has no case.

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[normiss 768]

hmmm...suddenly the term "fucking ex-girlfriend"
has a much nicer meaning...

[mamajumps 0]

The day of my divorce they were at the court house for something... bickered and fought the entire time. It made waiting the 4 hrs for my hearing miserable..but entertaining. I agree she has no case...

[CSpenceFLY 1]

On top of the obvious, the problem is we have a system that allows a suit to get this far. Thay should take the court costs out of her ass.

[npgraphicdesign 3]

Where do I sign up?

[downwardspiral 0]

What the fuck is wrong with that journalist? Divorced and separated are two different things. She just might have a case but the writer is too fucking dumb to make it clear to us.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[happythoughts 0]

It used to be that oral contracts were binding to $1000 and 6 months in duration, but this is different.

In their marriage vows, he said he "...until death do us part".
Why can't he show a little commitment?

I hope that he not been trying to weasel out of his other permanent obligations to her happiness.

[Nutz 0]

Quote

Quote

Is she SERIOUS??
Lottery!

They divorced in 1982!! Give me a fucking break... She has no case.

Um, did you read the article? THEY ARE NOT DIVORCED! He should have divorced her then he would not have this problem. I think she is going to get half, it isn't right but they are still married.

"Don't! Get! Eliminated!"

[downwardspiral 0]

Um did you? I mean it's the freakin headline for christs sake.

Quote

Woman Demands Lotto Winnings From Man She Divorced In 1982

But you just proved my point the writer is a dipshit.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[SuFantasma 0]

Quote

On top of the obvious, the problem is we have a system that allows a suit to get this far. Thay should take the court costs out of her ass.

I agree with Spence... the system is rigged to allow this kind of non-sense to even make it to the courts. And this is just one example of a civil matter, there are criminal cases which only have validity because the courts and the lawyers can impose insane amounts of money on prolonging the case.

I offer a simple solution for civil cases. Both parties are sequestered until the reach an agreement, without legal advise and only common sense to guide them. Upon reaching an agreement, the agreement is subject to a panel of Judges revision to rule out any illegal provisions of the agreement. Back to sequestering the parties to the suit until the agreement is legal and both parties agree to forever settle that claim.

Puts some skin on the game, cuts out "lawyerism" and by using a panel, it reduces (although not eliminates) blatant corruption.

Oh, one more thing... NO F****ING APPEALS

Y yo, pa' vivir con miedo, prefiero morir sonriendo, con el recuerdo vivo".
- Ruben Blades, "Adan Garcia"

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I offer a simple solution for civil cases. Both parties are sequestered until the reach an agreement,

Both in the same cell. Winner take all.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[shropshire 0]

Quote

Fucking ex-wives!!!

Yours or someone elses?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[normiss 768]

you're more than welcome to deal with my psycho on a fuck stick ex-wife.


I do have a buddy that swears by only dating married women...says they're the best!

[windcatcher 0]

Wow, she needs to get over it. She has no right to any of his money, unless he owes child support.

Mother to the cutest little thing in the world...

[stitch 0]

Quote

Wow, she needs to get over it. She has no right to any of his money, unless he owes child support.

But, but, she loaned him the money to buy the ticket. Only in the southeast.

"No cookies for you"- GFD
"I don't think I like the sound of that" ~ MB65
Don't be a "Racer Hater"

[nessvegas 0]

Ever the optimist, I asked my lawyer during the divorce what would happen if I came into a lotto type situation. He said that she would indeed be entitled to money (alimony increase) based not on my winnings but rather on the amount I earned per year off those winnings. Win two million, earn 200,000 per year off principle, pay her based on $200,000 per year. She has no case for lump sum.

_________________________________________
I married the right one......it just took me 2 times!

[mnealtx 0]

All the more reason not to cash the check while the divorce is pending!!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mamajumps 0]

update

http://www.theledger.com/article/20081120/NEWS/811200404/1410?Title=Lottery_Winner_Keeps_Jackpot

[CSpenceFLY 1]

now he should sue her for attorneys fees.

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

Despite living in different houses, the Codys continued to have a cordial relationship and went out socially, including to the dog track, where they would split the winnings. They had nine children together.

Nine? Doesn't anyone have hobbies?

***Ida Cody was herself living with another man at the time the lottery ticket was purchased and has had children with other men since the separation, Sessums said.

Kids with other men? Not "another man", but "other men".

Is she trying to start her own county?
When your kids number into the double-digits, you need to win the lottery.

She claimed to have given him money for the ticket
while living with another man. That guy has some definite MoJo going on for him.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Where do you think the phrase "Who da baby daddy" came from. I some circles it's a common question.