Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

BluegrassPreps.com

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Jim Nantz to Pay Up-OUCH!!!

Featured Replies

Good point.

 

Holla we want prenups.

 

we want prenups, yeah!

  • Replies 37
  • Views 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
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.

 

I think this sounds like a fair deal, plus give her two of the 4 homes.

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?

 

The same. Its apparently a no-fault divorce case.

 

One thing that you must understand about this, it was not ever "his money." It was always "marital" money, every penny he ever earned while married, that is the way the law looks at it. The alternative is the court placing a monetary value on her raising the kids, keeping the house, managing his social life, cooking the food, cleaning the clothes, and otherwise supporting his domestic life so that he has the ability to be the breadwinner. The court make that job simple - they call it HALF.

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.

 

I disagree. It appears his attorney negotiated she keeping the non-appreciating, non-liquid fixed assets (house) and he kept all the appreciating liquid assets (portfolio). He also tied all child support in as alimony, meaning he can deduct the entire amount against appreciated equities. Pretty tax-wise.

Eddie Murphy has the classic routine on this.

  • Author
I disagree. It appears his attorney negotiated she keeping the non-appreciating, non-liquid fixed assets (house) and he kept all the appreciating liquid assets (portfolio). He also tied all child support in as alimony, meaning he can deduct the entire amount against appreciated equities. Pretty tax-wise.

 

I disagree because I don't think you completely read the article. First of all, how is real estate non-appreciating? Over the long term, good real estate is one of the best investments you can make. Secondly, his monthly alimony payment is $72K/month or 864K/year. His separate child support payment will be $1K/week or 52K/year. So the alimony and the child support are not tied together. This is why I think he had a bad attorney. A lump sum settlement with her would have been much more advisable in my opinion.

Eddie Murphy has the classic routine on this.

 

You mean where he says she only has one job?

This will pale in comparison to what Shaq's wife will end up with.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.