Gwyneth Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 I think in my case, the amount of phone calls he made to me, as well as text messages and picture messages he has sent to me, would be evident enough that he was as into this as I was. Link to post Share on other sites
pollywag Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 of course. maybe this law would have workd 50 yrs ago when people snuck around to have affairs or when they would let the phone ring twice and hung up in order to say "my husband is out of the house come on over" but now a days with all the digital evidence you just cant. Another reason why it really makes me laugh to see relationships trying to parch up after an affair based on the story of the cheater alone. I say contact the person they had the affair with to look at all the trail of emails and text messages and listen to the phone messages and then decide what to do with what you have infront of you dont ask the cheater to tell you what happend. Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Anyone can be sued for AoA if they are the cause of damage to a marriage: therapists, cults, etc. Wow! You go for MC, and it becomes clear that the one partner is not willing to do their bit to make the M work, and expects the other to do all the changing and work... and then, because of that, the counsellor says "I don't think your M is going to work if you carry on like that," so they divorce, and the unwilling-to-work-on-it spouse sues for AoA?? Or, as in my MM's case, the W wouldn't go for IC, and dropped out of MC early on, but he persisted with IC and as a result came to realise the M was abusive, that he needed to stand up for himself against the abuse, etc - which he started doing. W didn't like it, became more abusive, MM withdrew affection etc to protect himself physically and emotionally... W could sue his counsellor if they lived in America? Wow. I can understand suing a cult, where an argument can be made for brainwashing, for decisions taken under undue pressure etc rather than freely and informedly. I could understand suing in cases where someone's judgment was impaired, due to a medical condition (a stroke, say) and someone else took advantage of that. But where someone has chosen freely, with all the information at their fingertips, to blame a third party who was merely persuasive seems to me completely OTT! Link to post Share on other sites
child_of_isis Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Garnish wages. Future wages and any future assets. 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!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites
LucreziaBorgia Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Wow! You go for MC, and it becomes clear that the one partner is not willing to do their bit to make the M work, and expects the other to do all the changing and work... and then, because of that, the counsellor says "I don't think your M is going to work if you carry on like that," so they divorce, and the unwilling-to-work-on-it spouse sues for AoA?? Or, as in my MM's case, the W wouldn't go for IC, and dropped out of MC early on, but he persisted with IC and as a result came to realise the M was abusive, that he needed to stand up for himself against the abuse, etc - which he started doing. W didn't like it, became more abusive, MM withdrew affection etc to protect himself physically and emotionally... W could sue his counsellor if they lived in America? Wow. In cases like this, the BS would have to prove that the marriage was happy prior to the affair. If the marriage was not happy at all, involved abuse, and was that way before the affair then the BS cannot sue for AoA. However, if the WS has sex with someone else, regardless of the state of the marriage then yes, the BS can sue for criminal conversation. Most of the cases in my state focus primarily on CC, because it is easier to prove (all they need is proof that OW/OM had any sort of sexual contact with the WS - most get the proof they need through a PI), and because there is practically no defense that the OW/OM can use. Link to post Share on other sites
bish Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Garnish wages. Future wages and any future assets. He has no wages. He is self-employed and has no assets and as far as I can see, will never have any. Link to post Share on other sites
RecordProducer Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 How does one prove the timing of something like lovemaking? Is oral sex? How about groping, or masturbating?Huh? I don't understand what you're asking, but many couples' affection, groping, kissing, hugging, lovemaking equals ZERO MINUTES. I don't see any vagueness with that. Masturbation is sex with yourself and I really wouldn't count how many times I masturbated and give the credit to my husband. I wasn't even thinking of him. Link to post Share on other sites
Author stillafool Posted October 26, 2007 Author Share Posted October 26, 2007 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..... TC you don't have a contract/license with these people or you probably could sue. A marriage is a contract/licensed agreement. Link to post Share on other sites
bish Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 I too think it's ludicrous a BS can sue the OW/OM for alienation of affection. It takes two to destroy a marriage Not always...sure maybe most of the time...50/50 of the time...I don't know. But sometimes it is just a matter of one party being nothing but a selfish louse that destroys a marriage. Link to post Share on other sites
bish Posted October 31, 2007 Share Posted October 31, 2007 Destroying the marriage....okay. So people are supposed to stay married because the law says be miserable? The idea of a law suit in this matter is obsurb. As funny as I find the idea of Alienation of Affection...would I sue? nah...not worth my time. Besides...my stbXW's man aint got nothin' to sue for. Having him in her life is my best revenge. She'll be smoking crack in the gutter somewhere and when I have the proof I need, I'll get my kids out of that enviornment. Besides. AOA isn't about staying with someone...its about betrayal. If you don't want to be married to your partner...then for pete's sake get a divorce. As far as I'm concerned the BS deserves the raw paper and not the real deal. Thats right...to hell with the BS....they deserve nothing less than pain right? this says more about you than anything else. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts