cococandy:


Pre-nups are for before weddings. Maybe he was poor before they got married. Or didn't have a significant wealth that calls for prenup.

How do you even know the money is half their worth? It could be way less than half. And half is rightfully hers

The fact that the definition of a prenup cites this clause: "...in the event of dissolution of marriage, all future earnings, property, and assets..." - means that a man doesn't necessarily have to be wealthy to enter one.

That aside, he married this woman in 1988 well after he became CEO of the company - the old man was no where near poor when they got married.


@bold text, please explain how half the wealth of a man rightfully belongs to his wife.

cococandy:
Ok I googled the man and he's worth a whooping 18billion dollars and all he could offer was less than one billion? He's greedy.

26yrs of her life spent helping you build your worth to 18billion and you're offering less than a billion.
Smh.

He should just try and make it 3billion. That's way less than half but I'm sure she will accept it so that she won't wreck his business.

Lmao...

How did she help him build his worth?
And how is it that the person who refused $975m but asked for more is the one that's not greedy to you?

Cococandy, abeg keep sentiments aside - that woman is just lucky her charms were enough to distract the man from drafting a prenup...it's her only saving grace.

Even in cases where they have been established before the marriage(like his own), it could still not cover it because it is deemed to have transcended time and the lines of ownership blurred such that it is not easy to determine in exact proportion what belongs to who and how much they have contributed or sacrificed to make it happen,hence it becomes community property.
Community property states can make divorce a horrible mess despite prenups or quit claim deeds.
Those documents offer only MINIMUM protection in such states. i mean it is some protection but not as much as the person who's wealthy would want.

Those things are tricky mehn and vary from state to state.
He's lucky he lives in Oklahoma (I'm assuming that also where the divorce was filed)
It is not a community property state
That's why he's able to get away with offering less than a billion(about 11percent or so) of his net worth.


I assume he also signed a prenup. If not her lawyer would have been pressing for much more.
You never sabi these shark lawyers

The way I see it,she just wants her share of the family money (afterall they are rich and probably have lots in savings) and not after his investment.i think mr man is just being stingy.he can offer more than that

property that is owned by one spouse before the marriage is sometimes referred to as the "separate property" of that spouse but there are instances where the community can gain an interest in separate property and even situations where separate property can be "transmuted" into community property. The rules for this vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. By agreement or action the married couple can turn (transmute) separate property into community property, including by commingling community and separate funds in one account...

By action she could pass off her work for the company as interest that amounts to community ownership. And a sneaky lawyer prenup or no prenup could find a way to make that work in her favor. Two people of the same level of wealth can get different divorce settlement results in the same courthouse from the same judge depending on the intricacies of their situation. But hey she's getting only 11percent or so. He's one lucky morrafocka

crackhaus:

The fact that the definition of a prenup cites this clause: "...in the event of dissolution of marriage, all future earnings, property, and assets..." - means that a man doesn't necessarily have to be wealthy to enter one.

That aside, he married this woman in 1988 well after he became CEO of the company - the old man was no where near poor when they got married.


@bold text, please explain how half the wealth of a man rightfully belongs to his wife.

crackhaus:

Lmao...

How did she help him build his worth?
And how is it that the person who refused $975m but asked for more is the one that's not greedy to you?

Cococandy, abeg keep sentiments aside - that woman is just lucky her charms were enough to distract the man from drafting a prenup...it's her only saving grace.

ehn? She worked for him. Are you telling me his company was worth 18billion in 1988 when they got married?
She worked harder than everyother shareholder in that company being a staff and a wife of the CEO.
Besides,you don't know one's spouse contributes a lot to their success?

Me I think he signed a prenup if not,he's supposed to be losing more.

I'm not being sentimental. If I was, I would say she deserved about 9billion.
I'm being practical now. He should just make it 3billion and stop being cheap

cococandy:
ehn? She worked for him. Are you telling me his company was worth 18billion in 1988 when they got married?
She worked harder than everyother shareholder in that company being a staff and a wife of the CEO.
Besides,you don't know one's spouse contributes a lot to their success?

Me I think he signed a prenup if not,he's supposed to be losing more.

I'm not being sentimental. If I was, I would say she deserved about 9billion.
I'm being practical now. He should just make it 3billion and stop being cheap

the guy is just being greedy.

They made 18billion together throught out the 26yrs. Normal sense means you share that in half.not only was she part of the office work,she was a wife and a mother.
if I were the woman,I'd collect 9 billion....nothing less.

cococandy:
ehn? She worked for him. Are you telling me his company was worth 18billion in 1988 when they got married?
She worked harder than everyother shareholder in that company being a staff and a wife of the CEO.
Besides,you don't know one's spouse contributes a lot to their success?

Me I think he signed a prenup if not,he's supposed to be losing more.

I'm not being sentimental. If I was, I would say she deserved about 9billion.
I'm being practical now. He should just make it 3billion and stop being cheap

When you're done making presumptions @bold texts, maybe you can cool down and tell me what exactly makes her entitled to/deserve half his wealth…with cogent and reasonable points

cococandy:

Even in cases where they have been established before the marriage(like his own), it could still not cover it because it is deemed to have transcended time and the lines of ownership blurred such that it is not easy to determine in exact proportion what belongs to who and how much they have contributed or sacrificed to make it happen,hence it becomes community property.
Community property states can make divorce a horrible mess despite prenups or quit claim deeds.
Those documents offer only MINIMUM protection in such states. i mean it is some protection but not as much as the person who's wealthy would want.

Those things are tricky mehn and vary from state to state.
He's lucky he lives in Oklahoma (I'm assuming that also where the divorce was filed)
It is not a community property state
That's why he's able to get away with offering less than a billion(about 11percent or so) of his net worth.


I assume he also signed a prenup. If not her lawyer would have been pressing for much more.
You never sabi these shark lawyers

The way I see it,she just wants her share of the family money (afterall they are rich and probably have lots in savings) and not after his investment.i think mr man is just being stingy.he can offer more than that




By action she could pass off her work for the company as interest that amounts to community ownership. And a sneaky lawyer prenup or no prenup could find a way to make that work in her favor. Two people of the same level of wealth can get different divorce settlement results in the same courthouse from the same judge depending on the intricacies of their situation. But hey she's getting only 11percent or so. He's one lucky morrafocka

No need for all this long story, the report already indicates that there was no prenup - I honestly don't know where you're getting your 'thoughts' from.

So who is the lucky person between both of them Cococandy?


I see you called him stingy instead, I was almost going to ask you how someone could be referred to as greedy for something that's already his...

crackhaus:

No need for all this long story, the report already indicates that there was no prenup - I honestly don't know where you're getting your 'thoughts' from.

So who is the lucky person between both of them Cococandy?


I see you called him stingy instead, I was almost going to ask you how someone could be referred to as greedy for something that's already his...

Ok no prenup? I missed that part
My bad.

See I said he's lucky. He is really lucky.
Without a prenup and he's only losing so little. He's the lucky person here. Others of his calibre have been severely hurt by divorces like these.
Why are you even on his side? His loss was extremely minimal. You should be like "yea that's my guy"
abi You think the wife doesn't deserve anything after 26yrs of marriage?

He's both stingy and greedy too.

He doesn't think 26yrs deserves a bit more out of the plenty money they are swimming in.
Like make it just 3billion?


_{Ok on a lighter note though all these plenty money these people are treating as nothing.
If they just give me 1million I will stop typing and go take a nap}

crackhaus:

When you're done making presumptions @bold texts, maybe you can cool down and tell me what exactly makes her entitled to/deserve half his wealth…with cogent and reasonable points

If you're asking me what makes a husband or wife deserve half of what he or she contributed to build, I'm not going to answer that. At all.
Is there a reason why the number of years determine the percentage the 'dependent' spouse gets?

It is obviously a question you know the answer to but would rather go in a merry go round to try circumvent.

cococandy:


Ok no prenup? I missed that part
My bad.

See I said he's lucky. He is really lucky.
Without a prenup and he's only losing so little. He's the lucky person here. Others of his calibre have been severely hurt by divorces like these.
Why are you even on his side? His loss was extremely minimal. You should be like "yea that's my guy"
abi You think the wife doesn't deserve anything after 26yrs of marriage?

He's both stingy and greedy too.

He doesn't think 26yrs deserves a bit more out of the plenty money they are swimming in.
Like make it just 3billion?


_{Ok on a lighter note though all these plenty money these people are treating as nothing.
If they just give me 1million I will stop typing and go take a nap}

Lol...

He may be stingy, which is something he has a right to be as it's his wealth we talking about...but greedy? absolutely not.

I didn't say the wife doesn't deserve anything, I said she is an angry, bitter, and greedy ex-wife who should be satisfied with $975m if she had a good spirit in her. I also wanted to know if she's a witch

cococandy:


Where I live, husband and wife are shareholders in EVERYTHING they acquired during their marriage.
It is called community property law. In the case of a divorce,everything is split down the middle 50-50 regardless who is the bringer of the wealth whether husband or wife.
In fact the person who stays home to be the home keeper could get a higher share if the judge determines and his/her lawyer is able to prove that having stayed home all those years limited their earning potential and as such is considered a sacrifice on that person's part to make the marriage work.

This lady here says she worked with the husband for 26yrs. Who knows how much their company grew in those years? And if her contribution in keeping home and work afloat made them last that long, that could be considered as equal contriubtion even in a non-community law system state. If she has a good lawyer she can get her rightful 50percent.

If the company is worth 10billion dollars(assumption) and he's giving her less than one billion,that's not fair. It is cheating.

But then we don't know how much their company is worth so I can't really say whether the wife is right or being greedy.
But just thought you should that husband and wife are shareholders in each other's earnings

We are saying the same thing. Like I clearly stated, the fact that she is his wife alone is enough to get her half of what they got while married. So she should not bother about the work part esp if she was earning her salary from that job.

crackhaus:

Lol...

He may be stingy, which is something he has a right to be as it's his wealth we talking about...but greedy? absolutely not.

I didn't say the wife doesn't deserve anything, I said she is an angry, bitter, and greedy ex-wife who should be satisfied with $975m if she had a good spirit in her. I also wanted to know if she's a witch

Na wa. That kain money go make me enter coma. Chei, people are rich o.

elantraceey:
She's just described in one word 'greedy'



Not as if am judging her though.

I wouldn't call greedy. She probably put as much energy as her husband did into building the company.

delishpot:


Na wa. That kain money go make me enter coma. Chei, people are rich o.

We rich o... (I claim it)

Mentioning millions anyhow, no be small thing o

goofyone:
I wouldn't call greedy. She probably put as much energy as her husband did into building the company.

Then that should make her understand that the buisness is not stable.

delishpot:


We are saying the same thing. Like I clearly stated, the fact that she is his wife alone is enough to get her half of what they got while married. So she should not bother about the work part esp if she was earning her salary from that job.

ok

Xion:


We rich o... (I claim it)

Mentioning millions anyhow, no be small thing o

Ha ha, abeg give me some of your claimed riches.

delishpot:


Ha ha, abeg give me some of your claimed riches.

Oya, at this level, you have to act with faith...

Send me your account details by faith

Xion:


Oya, at this level, you have to act with faith...

Send me your account details by faith

Recieve it by faith.

delishpot:


Recieve it by faith.

Just sent it by faith, hope you got it...
Share with someone who needs it

delishpot:


Na wa. That kain money go make me enter coma. Chei, people are rich o.

It's really a lot of money...

Xion:
God, biko, bless my handwork, give me the right attitude to work and wealth. Make me a good husband and father, bless me with a good wife. Give me the grace to bless others. N'aha Jisos, amem

Amen

Xion:
God, biko, bless my handwork, give me the right attitude to work and wealth. Make me a good husband and father, bless me with a good wife. Give me the grace to bless others. N'aha Jisos, amem

Amen! Ka onye w'anyi za ekpere anyi.

cococandy:


Where I live, husband and wife are shareholders in EVERYTHING they acquired during their marriage.
It is called community property law. In the case of a divorce,everything is split down the middle 50-50 regardless who is the bringer of the wealth whether husband or wife.
In fact the person who stays home to be the home keeper could get a higher share if the judge determines and his/her lawyer is able to prove that having stayed home all those years limited their earning potential and as such is considered a sacrifice on that person's part to make the marriage work.

This lady here says she worked with the husband for 26yrs. Who knows how much their company grew in those years? And if her contribution in keeping home and work afloat made them last that long, that could be considered as equal contriubtion even in a non-community law system state. If she has a good lawyer she can get her rightful 50percent.

If the company is worth 10billion dollars(assumption) and he's giving her less than one billion,that's not fair. It is cheating.

But then we don't know how much their company is worth so I can't really say whether the wife is right or being greedy.
But just thought you should that husband and wife are shareholders in each other's earnings

Nice summary of the family/community property laws in most US jurisdictions. I'll add that the percentage of money due to the woman varies.
For instance, Tiger Woods ex-wife got a $300 million divorce settlement, whilst Tiger was worth at least $1bn.

CFCfan:

Nice summary of the family/community property laws in most US jurisdictions

you're the lawyer here. Pls help us give more details.

That was the little I learned from legal advise when we bought our house.

cococandy:
you're the lawyer here. Pls help us give more details.

That was the little I learned from legal advise when we bought our house.

Lol. I'm still learning

But here in California, it's only the monetary value of assets acquired before marriage, that won't be shared equally.
For instance, if I bought a $500,000 beach-front property before I got married, I won't be legally liable to pay $250,000 (half the property value) to my ex-wife.

CFCfan:

Lol. I'm still learning

But here in California, it's only the monetary value of assets acquired before marriage, that won't be shared equally.
For instance, if I bought a $500,000 beach-front property before I got married, I won't be legally liable to pay $250,000 (half the property value) to my ex-wife.

what about the profits made from the property or investment.

Say you had a million dollar company before marriage and it grew to a hundred million during the marriage?

She is supposed to be getting 9billion sef

SAMBARRY:
I don't think she wants to divorce the man. She's non verbally telling the man that the marriage is more important than his money. It's like she wants to fix it

Kulye the known misandrist is making sense these days.

What is the secret,abi your runaway baby papa finally came back to his senses to handle his responsibilities?

In everything sha we thank the lord for answering our prayers and turning your misfortune around.

cococandy:
what about the profits made from the property or investment.

Say you had a million dollar company before marriage and it grew to a hundred million during the marriage?

Then, the ex-wife won't be eligible to receive any shares of the initial $1 million value of the company. She would only be entitled to a portion of the company's value derived during the marriage.
In some other states, the lady could be entitled to between 30-50% of everything, regardless of whether they were acquired before or in the course of the marriage.

That's why book-keeping is important in divorce proceedings.

Gbam


You have said it all

aisha2:




Hence Nigerian women will keep remaining slaves, an agreement is an agreement he should stick to it, its not about the money. You are ready to sit eat shit pray and fast and take whatever crumbs is thrown your way she isn't, thats why our women here will continue to open lamentation threads everyday, he beat me, he cheated, he wont sleep with me, and they continue to get shitty advice while those who have standards hold on to their standards and insist the right thing be done. Don't hate, raise your own standards from a professional shi-t chopper to a woman who knows what she wants and stands by it