Why Don't BS sue OW?

[silktricks]

They dont have AoA in my state... so we have to do things the old fashion way.

 

Hmmmm, and what might the old fashioned way be????

 

 

And not to be really nit-picky, but AoA is the old-fashioned way. I believe it used to be available in all states (as well as the UK), and as someone on this thread said, it was only available for men..... but back then women couldn't own anything anyway, 'cuz we was property!! Ownership was faaaarrrr to much for our feeble little brains to manage.

[Star Gazer]

The law actually originated in the time when men thought that they owned their wives. If another man stole your W's attention and affection, you could sue. Women weren't allowed to sue their H's mistresses. They just had to deal with it.

 

Now that the law is being used by women, people are wanting to get rid of it.

 

No it didn't. The law doesn't stem from property rights, but breach of contract law.

[NoIDidn't]

No it didn't. The law doesn't stem from property rights, but breach of contract law.

 

And property rights. At least that was the case conjectured in North Carolina when a XW won a $1M judgment against her H's new W.

 

You may be right, but I don't see how someone else can be sued for breach of contract if they had nothing to do with the contract.

[Je Ne Regrette Rien]

But AoA laws are not for suing because you were "hurt". They are because you lost something. Many BSs using the law, do so after a divorce has been filed for by the spouse that is leaving for the new lover. Some BSs stay at home with children and don't work outside the home. They are losing a steady income in that case. Some BSs sue as a matter of principle. They feel that the other person took something of value from them, so they are hitting the other person back where it should hurt as well.

 

I doubt most people that do it, do so because of "hurt". You can slash tires for that. LOL.

 

The "hurt" reference came from what Cobra said about laws protecting people because of the hurt and wrongs done to us by others. I must have misunderstood his "hurt" reference.

 

I certainly don't understand how an OW/OM can be sued when they have not entered into a legal contract with the betrayed spouse, the contract has been broken by the wayward spouse and it would have to be proved that the OW/OM in some way pursued or forced the wayward spouse to break that contract to place responsibility big enough to sue?

 

Anyhoo, to lighten the mood, here's another few laws in the USA I think are bizarre...

 

* In Alabama incestous marriages are legal

* In Alaska a kangaroo may not enter a barbers shop at anytime

*In Arizona, Donkeys cant sleep in bathtubs

*In DC any other position apart from missionary are illegal

*In Hawaii coins are not allowed to be placed in ones ears

 

 

But...we have crazy laws too in the UK...

 

*In Scotland it is illegal to be in drunk possession of a cow

*AIt is illegal for boys under the age of ten to see a naked mannequin

*Taxi drivers are all legally required to ask passengers if they have smallpox or the plague

*It is illegal to hang a bed out of a window

 

We're all crazy.

[bish]

I'm in Illinois and we have the Alienation of Affection in effect here.

 

I'd use it myself...by my stbEXW's loser bf doesn't have a pot to piss in....DAMMIT!!!!!

[Cinabon]

What is the point in sueing the OW or OM?

 

If the H or W leave for someone else, get a D and move on. What is sueing someone else going to do for the other person? JMO

[Tomcat33]

Je Ne Regrette I agree with everything you said. Funny thing is Cobra was offended by your post but I made a similar one in the first page myself which I guess he missed....(TC tip toes out of room....)

 

I think I prefer the legal system of the UK what can I say...there is something to be said for a society that does not feel the need to be rewarded large sums of $$$ in order to subscribe to specific MORAL code. We are talking ethics in morality, suing an OP is a question of morals.

 

Where do we draw the line? I know!! we can then try to sue our partner's exes for making them a crazy and leaving them with all this baggage we now are left to deal with? Why not? It's ruining my current life, life with a more sane partner would improve my quality of life susbstantially and it would also improve the lives of my children. HECK why stop there? sue parents for the scars they left in their children as well, god know our partner's scars also stem from childhood!!

 

 

Ok fine you enter into private property and steal a possession that is not belonging to you, let the courts prosecute. You...crash your car into somoene because you were carelessly speeding or drunk and leave them in a wheel chair, pay your dues. You rape someone, throw him the book.

 

BUT when you try to start playing with cashing in on people's mishaps based on choices of morality, emotion or stupidity-gone-civil right, as in the case of the woman who sued MacDonalds for burning her thigh with a hot cup of coffee....(notice the warning is right in the order "hot cut of coffee") that's when a legislating body needs to take a step back and say "ok excatly which bottle are our my meds coming from these days because I'm making calls that are down right nutty"

 

 

You Brits are a fine bunch and I am not being biassed because I am Canadian and I find our cultures somewhat similar, BUT this really takes the cake:

 

*In Scotland it is illegal to be in drunk possession of a cow

*AIt is illegal for boys under the age of ten to see a naked mannequin

*Taxi drivers are all legally required to ask passengers if they have smallpox or the plague

*It is illegal to hang a bed out of a window

 

 

:laugh::laugh: thanks for the belly laugh JNR that was priceless "do you have smallpox or the plague" Did they even have taxis back in the 1800s when the bubonic plague was around?

[norajane]

What is the point in sueing the OW or OM?

 

If the H or W leave for someone else, get a D and move on. What is sueing someone else going to do for the other person? JMO

 

Money. Might come in handy when starting the new life post divorce.

 

And if the WS was giving gifts, taking the OP out to dinners and drinks, going on weekend trips away or vacations, paying for hotel rooms and whatnot, or paying the OP's rent and bills, then the WS was spending joint marital assets.

[Tomcat33]

Money. Might come in handy when starting the new life post divorce.

 

And if the WS was giving gifts, taking the OP out to dinners and drinks, going on weekend trips away or vacations, paying for hotel rooms and whatnot, or paying the OP's rent and bills, then the WS was spending joint marital assets.

 

 

That's true, so you sue the staff of your company for using money that belonged to the company and was spent on entertainment dinners with friends far and beyond what the company wishes to expense. You don't sue the the people your employees expensed.

 

Happens all the time in business good luck trying to claim that one!

[Cinabon]

Money. Might come in handy when starting the new life post divorce.

 

And if the WS was giving gifts, taking the OP out to dinners and drinks, going on weekend trips away or vacations, paying for hotel rooms and whatnot, or paying the OP's rent and bills, then the WS was spending joint marital assets.

 

So if there are kids involved. BS tries to make sure the kids are screwed with at the ex's place?

 

So make a new life on someone elses dime? What ever happened to making YOUR OWN LIFE

[norajane]

*shrug*

 

I've never been married, and I'm not a family law attorney, so I'm just guessing that money would be a motivation, especially in a no-fault divorce state where you can't get more money in the settlement for adultery.

 

People can easily avoid being sued by not getting involved, and the WS can avoid having their OP sued by not wandering. Get the divorce first, then date whoever you want.

 

As to making your OWN LIFE, perhaps that's a bit challenging at first to a SAHM that's not had a job in 15 years because she was minding the kids while hubby was out having his affair and spending the money on an OW.

[NoIDidn't]

So if there are kids involved. BS tries to make sure the kids are screwed with at the ex's place?

 

So make a new life on someone elses dime? What ever happened to making YOUR OWN LIFE

 

Didn't the OP make a new life on top of the BSs? Why is that not a fair turnabout using your own logic? Because, yeah, what ever happened to going out and getting YOUR OWN SPOUSE not someone elses.

 

Only used capital lettering to match your own. Nothing personal.

[Cinabon]

Well, that is what Alimony is for....I still see NO reason for a BS to go after a OW or OM.

 

I mean really. think about it. If there are kids involved , the kids are going to that household to spend time with the other parent. Why would a BS want their child to be deprived one way or the other..

 

And making a life of their own. I would think the person would want to rebuild their self-esteem if it was damaged on their OWN.

[Cinabon]

Didn't the OP make a new life on top of the BSs? Why is that not a fair turnabout using your own logic? Because, yeah, what ever happened to going out and getting YOUR OWN SPOUSE not someone elses.

 

Only used capital lettering to match your own. Nothing personal.

 

Again...Alimony..

 

So your suggesting people should play the TIT for TAT game..

 

I think the whole idea is laughable and stupid. JMO

[Mustang Sally]

We're all crazy.

Amen to THAT.

[norajane]

Well, that is what Alimony is for....I still see NO reason for a BS to go after a OW or OM.

 

I mean really. think about it. If there are kids involved , the kids are going to that household to spend time with the other parent. Why would a BS want their child to be deprived one way or the other..

 

And making a life of their own. I would think the person would want to rebuild their self-esteem if it was damaged on their OWN.

 

Again, adultery doesn't get you any more in alimony in no-fault divorce states.

 

And if the WS was spending all that money for years (like some affairs last), then that was years worth of marital assets being drained. So if it's communal property state, for example, the BS would get 50% of the assets that have been drained for years by being spent on the OP, not 50% of what would have been there had the WS not been spending it on someone else.

 

Self-esteem and money for bills aren't the same thing.

[NoIDidn't]

Again...Alimony..

 

So your suggesting people should play the TIT for TAT game..

 

I think the whole idea is laughable and stupid. JMO

 

Alimony isn't rewarded for principle. It is awarded because the spouse getting it has a right to it for a season if they depended on a lifestyle out of their reach because of divorce. Plus, alimony is rarely ever awarded for longer than 2 to 5 years, and its not much unless your spouse was a millionaire practically.

 

So are you saying that since the "best person won" the other should just fade away into obscurity? I don't find that tit for tat. But that's just me. I know that no one would ever be coming after me on that charge. My state doesn't have it.

[Cinabon]

Well, My feeling is this...I dont think a MM/MW that cares about their childern are going to leave them with NOTHING.

 

Alimony covers the bills. and some for alot of people. And mostly ALL w's are left the home and car...etc. when kids are involved.

[Cinabon]

Alimony isn't rewarded for principle. It is awarded because the spouse getting it has a right to it for a season if they depended on a lifestyle out of their reach because of divorce. Plus, alimony is rarely ever awarded for longer than 2 to 5 years, and its not much unless your spouse was a millionaire practically.

 

So are you saying that since the "best person won" the other should just fade away into obscurity? I don't find that tit for tat. But that's just me. I know that no one would ever be coming after me on that charge. My state doesn't have it.

 

 

So are you saying the whole thing with sueing is a prize?

 

Sorry, about I cant be sold on the idea. I have made my own money. My own business. And if some woman wanted to take that from me , because of a prize or anger , then sorry she is pathetic.

 

It more or less sounds to me like 2 kids playing in a school yard. And one throws a rock at a child and the other child instead of doing the correct things gets a bigger rock to throw at them.

[Trialbyfire]

So are you saying the whole thing with sueing is a prize?

 

Sorry, about I cant be sold on the idea. I have made my own money. My own business. And if some woman wanted to take that from me , because of a prize or anger , then sorry she is pathetic.

 

It more or less sounds to me like 2 kids playing in a school yard. And one throws a rock at a child and the other child instead of doing the correct things gets a bigger rock to throw at them.

What a great idea!!

[underpants]

It is just another risk that a potential OP should consider before or during an A. IMHO.

 

Yes, it happens. For whatever motive and under whatever 'titled action' someone with cause can muster. There are attorneys who think outside of the litigation box.

 

People will pay alot to have things not brought to public attention. There are also people who want documentation of someone's character on record...even if it is painted under another action. Just sayin'.

 

If it does not happen through the court system, then as Cobra suggested there are 'old fashion' ways of dealing with things. This happens also (probably more often).

 

Just things to consider.

[NoIDidn't]

Well, My feeling is this...I dont think a MM/MW that cares about their childern are going to leave them with NOTHING.

 

Alimony covers the bills. and some for alot of people. And mostly ALL w's are left the home and car...etc. when kids are involved.

 

I know that some don't agree, but I think that a man or woman OWES their spouse SOMETHING when they walk out on them, for whatever reason. Sure they owe the kids something, but its just wrong, IMHO, to not think the same in the terms of the person that created those kids with you.

 

Its like disrespect on top of disrespect when a man or woman think that they can leave the spouse that they betrayed with nothing just because THEY are moving on.

 

Governments sentence defendants guilty of treason to death. If one was in a business partnership and one partner caused it to go bankrupt, the debt would be spread to all in the partnership. The person that didn't make the debt, or maybe didn't even know about it, doesn't get to walk away unaffected. Why should marriage, a contract in the eyes of the law, be any different?

 

(I know, I'm being extreme...but maybe I am not. It really depends. I happen to think that treason shouldn't be punished by death. But, that's just me.)

[Cinabon]

Sorry I dont and cant agree with the whole thought..IMO is pathetic and screams " oh poor me"

 

I might sound harsh. I'm just shaking my head at the whole thought behind it...SORRY

[Trialbyfire]

Sorry I dont and cant agree with the whole thought..IMO is pathetic and screams " oh poor me"

 

I might sound harsh. I'm just shaking my head at the whole thought behind it...SORRY

Why? It's like saying it's pathetic for a business owner to repay in spades, the cut-throat methodology of its competitor. It's the way of the world or to use a phrase coined by another member "The law of the jungle".

[Tomcat33]

We should sue people for cutting us off on the road.

 

We should also sue our friends for turning out to be $hitty friends.

 

We should sue our employers for lying to us telling us work is 9-5 when we all know a lot of days in fact it is 9-6 or even 7.

 

We should sue advertising agencies because when I drive an Audie I am not smiling like goof with a James Bond type in my passenger seat.

 

 

We should sue people for cutting in front of us in line, bad manners are prefect candidates for a law suit.

 

We should DEFINITELY sue the government for all those times we voted for those candidates that had great plans for our money BEFORE they had their hands on it but just sank our country and pockets further into the ground once in office.

 

 

What a joke this spoon fed, top rewards for minimal output, nation we live in is :lmao:

 

Hands up!! Who has to go pop their TV dinner in the microwave?

 

Mehhhh don't bother, I can totally imagine who.....