I'm with Hearsay on this one. You divorce someone and you're the breadwinner, you pay up.

OK, look at it more bluntly.

 

Mrs. Nantz spends her life antiquing, going to her chalet in Switzerland, getting her hair frosted every Thursday, donating money to the poodles relief fund so she gets her name in the society papers, and buying an new dress, necklace and hat every Sunday afternoon.

 

Should she be required to discontinue that life because her husband elected to bang some makeup artist skank he met at work? After raising his child for 18 years while he was jet-setting the globe for sporting interviews?

I realize she is used to a lavish lifestyle but it was because of his money. I understand why this settlement happened, I just don't agree with it. Honest question, what do you think she would have received if it had been a mutual split?

I realize she is used to a lavish lifestyle but it was because of his money.

 

I don't know how your family works but there is no "his money" or "her money" where I live.

I don't know how your family works but there is no "his money" or "her money" where I live.

I guess that's what prenups are for.

I guess that's what prenups are for.

 

Good point.

 

Holla we want prenups.

Pre-nups? They were married 26 years. How long as Jim Nantz been a household name?

I say give her a lump sum of 5MM and be done with her. I am sure he would continue to support his daughter for life. I think he had a horrible attorney.

Cynthia George, Lorrie Nantz's Greenwich-based attorney, said she and her client had no comment except that they were pleased with the decision.

 

That may be the biggest understatement since Jim Lovell said "Houston, we've had a problem."

That's alot of money. Does she have to pay taxes on the alimony?

That may be the biggest understatement since Jim Lovell said "Houston, we've had a problem."

:lol:

I don't know how your family works but there is no "his money" or "her money" where I live.

 

 

 

:thumb::thumb: Exactly. I cringe every time I hear that.

I don't know how your family works but there is no "his money" or "her money" where I live.

 

:thumb:

I don't know how your family works but there is no "his money" or "her money" where I live.

 

True, there is only “her money” and what she decides to give me.

If this were reversed and Lorrie Nantz was the breadwinner and Jim was the stay-at-home, do you all think the decision would have been similar? I know that's rarely the case, but just saying...

I thought Forrest was the one who had the "Houston" quote. :idunno: