pollywag Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I think I should stop looking at people's dogs too.... I might get sued. If you look at me I'll sue you. Look away now. Link to post Share on other sites
milx Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Don't talk to me. I'll sue you! Hahhhh!!! Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I used to be a SAHM (& graduate student) and I left my XH (who cheated on me) and embarked on a career and now I make twice as much as him...Now that's the best revenge there is... Why give the OP more power than they actually had...Your beef should be with the spouse...he/she's the one who owes you something... So revenge is about the money? I agree that the issue resides with the oathbreaker. Link to post Share on other sites
Lyssa Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I agree that the issue resides with the oathbreaker. Why is it that you always beat me at posting, Cobra?? Why not just sue instead of whining about it? I think there is a bigger issue to sue than suing OW/OM, chairs, animals, tables... Link to post Share on other sites
RecordProducer Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 What is the point in sueing the OW or OM? They want money. The whole moralization is spinning around $$$ (talking about those who actually take the case to court). Regarding suing someone for an affair, I think establishing the "guilt" is a one-sided approach. What should be explored is how the cheated spouse contributed to the affair, too. Link to post Share on other sites
MrsHellnoFire Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 so ridiculous... as if the OW tied the MM up and force him to have sex... geeezzz... I'm so glad I live in Canada... and most states now have a no fault ... im also glad you live in canada. lol. j/k Link to post Share on other sites
MrsHellnoFire Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 so you sue the ow even though the mm did not have a gun to his head or was physically forced into anything.. shouldn't the mm get sued before the ow? maybe if you could prove that this sexually enticing woman would not give up and continually tried to seduce and arouse this innocent poor young mm. ... lol. i mean come on now. Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 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. Only if they were married in community of property, or under the accrual system. Otherwise their assets remain separate, beyond what each agrees to contribute to the marital enterprise (home, kids, etc). Link to post Share on other sites
OpenBook Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Regarding suing someone for an affair, I think establishing the "guilt" is a one-sided approach. What should be explored is how the cheated spouse contributed to the affair, too. Great point RP!! If I was on the defense team, this is the area I would be concentrating on. I would want the jury to get the complete picture of the whole miserable situation before they rush to judgment. Maybe this is why it hasn't become law in most states. It's just too subjective a call. Link to post Share on other sites
NoIDidn't Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 They want money. The whole moralization is spinning around $$$ (talking about those who actually take the case to court). Regarding suing someone for an affair, I think establishing the "guilt" is a one-sided approach. What should be explored is how the cheated spouse contributed to the affair, too. What did the BS contribute to the affair besides not knowing about it? In these cases, the M IS put on trial. Relevant things like 'when was the last time you (the spouses) had sex' are asked. The M is put on trial, which is why I personally wouldn't sue. But I will defend anyone else's right to do as they please legally. Link to post Share on other sites
RecordProducer Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 What did the BS contribute to the affair besides not knowing about it? I didn't cheat on my hubby, but let's say I did and he sued me. How did he contribute to my affair? He hasn't had sex with me for six months and the affection has been almost non-existent. He hasn't even touched my body other than friendly sleeping together. Before this period, we only had sex like twice a month because I insisted: I would have to catch him while sleeping (otherwise he wouldn't do it), he'd wake up and ask me to stop. It was awful. I was constantly starved for affection and intimacy. The reasons for his behavior are totally his fault and it wouldn't do him any good to present them at court, especially since they include a major deceit on his part. I was emotionally neglected and abused by his family, while I had no one here in the US: no friends, no family, no job. What else could I do but look for warmth and understanding elsewhere? I couldn't leave, because I have no place to go, no money, and two kids on my back. Sounds like a pretty good case, doesn't it? Well the whole situation is hypothetical, but I can tell you that the only reason why I haven't cheated was because I never had the chance to meet anyone interesting (and I wasn't looking or planning to cheat anyway). I think it's a shame to toss a good marriage for a little bit of excitement, but in marriages like mine, it just wouldn't be cheating. This marriage was a miscarriage. Link to post Share on other sites
pythonshoes Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I didn't cheat on my hubby, but let's say I did and he sued me. How did he contribute to my affair? He hasn't had sex with me for six months and the affection has been almost non-existent. He hasn't even touched my body other than friendly sleeping together. Before this period, we only had sex like twice a month because I insisted: I would have to catch him while sleeping (otherwise he wouldn't do it), he'd wake up and ask me to stop. It was awful. I was constantly starved for affection and intimacy. How does one prove the timing of something like lovemaking? Is oral sex? How about groping, or masturbating? Link to post Share on other sites
lost4ever Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 The same way you would define Affection - Link to post Share on other sites
squeak Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 "I know I'm going to get blasted, but if anyone here has ever seen a single woman at the office bending down and letting 'ol MM see down her blouse and stopping by his desk to bring him coffee because he looks so down, I think that is evil behavior.".....................................................................I think that people who get offended by men admiring women at work do so because they don't get admired much themselves. Should we sue good looking women for getting admired by all men alike? Yeah why not sue hot women too. Admiring women at work? No- I disagree. I gave a real example of someone at work who seeks out a certain MM-to titillate and seduce through deliberate provocative behavior. Also- bending down purposely to let someone else see her goods isn't really "being admired" , I would call that "deliberate whorish behavior". It is not just about the cup of coffee, or the provocative behavior as seperate instances, she is on a mission, the sum of her actions really have intention behind them. Mainly to seduce the MM. It is obvious to everyone, and puts him in a bad situation. That is not admiring. I would classify being admired is when you aren't really going out of your way, it is more of a passive action. Why would this lead to the thought that next "hot women" will get sued? That is really silly. My point was people should be held accountable-and i mean the MM/MW more so than anyone, and in this specific case I mentioned too. This woman I gave as an example of someone who, if she became an OW through aggressive actions and seduction, is par for being sued by the BS if an affair happened. That is pretty much the only time I would think it would be worth it. This post made me think about that aspect. I feel people who tend to get these two seperate behaviors mixed up don't know the difference between recieving admiration and provocative behavior that seeks it out, because they cannot get any admiring looks/responses any other way. And Katanya, thank you for you thoughtful response to my post, you raised many good points through rational argument and thoughtful responses-always appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites
Je Ne Regrette Rien Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 This thread is hilarious by the way... Cobra I'm not wrong - and I'm not right either, and I hate to break this to you my friend, but neither are you - we're stating opinions about what we believe in. Opinions. That's it. And it's my belief that suing for emotional pain is ludicrous. LIFE is emotional pain in many parts. I don't believe in getting some sort of monetary payback for it. Next thing I'll hear - there's insurance policies for those who are getting married in case one of them has an affair to cover the legal fees of the other person? Stranger things have happened. I don't believe in whimsical suing. I believe in the law. I believe in being protected by the law. I do not believe in suing for things that happen in life - and we all know, affairs happen. Betrayed spouses are protected by maintenance payments and child support. What more, other than extra financial security, can suing bring? Take him for everything he's got because he betrayed me? Tell everyone about the affair because he betrayed me? If they have the money to risk on suing (which over here is a risky game) they don't have monetary worries. Usually, I can see two sides to the story. Not getting it on this, I just don't understand it. Maybe it's a cultural thing. Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 This thread is hilarious by the way... Cobra I'm not wrong - and I'm not right either, and I hate to break this to you my friend, but neither are you - we're stating opinions about what we believe in. Opinions. That's it. And it's my belief that suing for emotional pain is ludicrous. LIFE is emotional pain in many parts. I don't believe in getting some sort of monetary payback for it. Next thing I'll hear - there's insurance policies for those who are getting married in case one of them has an affair to cover the legal fees of the other person? Stranger things have happened. I don't believe in whimsical suing. I believe in the law. I believe in being protected by the law. I do not believe in suing for things that happen in life - and we all know, affairs happen. Betrayed spouses are protected by maintenance payments and child support. What more, other than extra financial security, can suing bring? Take him for everything he's got because he betrayed me? Tell everyone about the affair because he betrayed me? If they have the money to risk on suing (which over here is a risky game) they don't have monetary worries. Usually, I can see two sides to the story. Not getting it on this, I just don't understand it. Maybe it's a cultural thing. What can I say. I understand where your coming from. Its exactly as you say though I have a different opinion. It may be a cultural thing... I mean where I come from we want things to be fair and equal. Really thats the core motive here. I suppose the law was originally written to keep poeple from taking thier own justice. Is that not where many of our laws come from to begin with? I also have a strong faith in the legal system. Yeah, some lawsuits are dumb... but if a person can convince 12 impartial people otherwise... maybe that person has a point. So, yeah... I understand where your coming from. You basically feel that its impractical, and would be applied imperfectly. I'm not really disagreeing with that... I'm saying even though that may be true... we should at least provide them the option to try! Oh, and the underline portion is probably the best business idea I've heard in a long time! You might have been thinking funny, but its really really smart. Link to post Share on other sites
Je Ne Regrette Rien Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 What can I say. I understand where your coming from. Its exactly as you say though I have a different opinion. It may be a cultural thing... I mean where I come from we want things to be fair and equal. Really thats the core motive here. I suppose the law was originally written to keep poeple from taking thier own justice. Is that not where many of our laws come from to begin with? I also have a strong faith in the legal system. Yeah, some lawsuits are dumb... but if a person can convince 12 impartial people otherwise... maybe that person has a point. So, yeah... I understand where your coming from. You basically feel that its impractical, and would be applied imperfectly. I'm not really disagreeing with that... I'm saying even though that may be true... we should at least provide them the option to try! Oh, and the underline portion is probably the best business idea I've heard in a long time! You might have been thinking funny, but its really really smart. So maybe we're reading from the same page after all, in a strange kind of way... Granted, I believe people should have the right to fight for wrongs done against them in criminal law. However, in civil law, this isn't an event with a jury, not in the UK, solely with legal practitioners. I believe fully in innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I cannot see how reasonable doubt can be proven in matters of the heart, because its one standpoint against another. I agree, if, for example, a MM uses finances brought in by BW to buy items for OW, that money by rights isn't his to give away. That's tangible - it can be proved. However, suing because of alienation of affection is a step too far IMO. There's nothing tangible to sue for. And, as for my business idea, if you set it up, can I have a portion of the profits? Looks like I may need it if this law gets brought to the UK Link to post Share on other sites
LucreziaBorgia Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 In AoA cases, it is not necessarily the loss of intangible love that you are suing for - rather the damage done to the tangible contract of marriage because of a loss of that love. Anyone can be sued for AoA if they are the cause of damage to a marriage: therapists, cults, etc. - not just OW/OM. Criminal conversation is a little more black and white - that is what people most often sue for in my state. CC is sex with another person's spouse. If you are caught having sex with someone else's spouse and you are sued and brought to court, there really isn't any defense for you, or any way to fight it. You are at the mercy of the jury, who will award the BS what they deem appropriate in terms of the damage done to them. Often in the multiple thousands - sometimes millions. Link to post Share on other sites
Cobra_X30 Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 So maybe we're reading from the same page after all, in a strange kind of way... Granted, I believe people should have the right to fight for wrongs done against them in criminal law. However, in civil law, this isn't an event with a jury, not in the UK, solely with legal practitioners. I believe fully in innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. I cannot see how reasonable doubt can be proven in matters of the heart, because its one standpoint against another. I agree, if, for example, a MM uses finances brought in by BW to buy items for OW, that money by rights isn't his to give away. That's tangible - it can be proved. However, suing because of alienation of affection is a step too far IMO. There's nothing tangible to sue for. And, as for my business idea, if you set it up, can I have a portion of the profits? Looks like I may need it if this law gets brought to the UK Well, maybe you can have some of the profits after your done with the lawsuit... LOL. The way I see it all you have to do is prove 1. The OM/OW knew the person was married. 2. That they allowed a 'more than friends' relationship to form. Get those two and you got a case! I understand what side of the fence your on. So I understand why you think the way you do. Link to post Share on other sites
Gwyneth Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 In today's New York Post, there was a small clip about a husband who sued his wife's lover for "alienation of affection." I showed it to the guy I was having the affair with. We both laughed. We laughed because we know how ridiculous to sue is. We're on both sides--the pursuer who is married, and the pursuer who is not married (me). We know how this happened, and it happened because we both wanted it to happen. As someone else pointed out before, if one of us "lured" and pressured the other person into this affair, then yes, that constitutes as sexual harassment. That's a whole nother entity. An affair happens because the two people involved wanted it to happen. So for the BS to sue is ridiculous because that person does not know the circumstances involved. If anything, they should sue their spouse for either a divorce, or emotional distress. Link to post Share on other sites
Treatment Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Only if they were married in community of property, or under the accrual system. Otherwise their assets remain separate, beyond what each agrees to contribute to the marital enterprise (home, kids, etc). It depends upon where you reside. Link to post Share on other sites
Treatment Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Hmmmm - where my wife works a married man who was having an affair wish a co-worker attempted to sue the company for not protecting him from her. He claimed the company did not adequately protect the men in the company from her sexual advances. This was after the affair was over and he found out that she had a number of affairs with other men prior to their affair. Link to post Share on other sites
troutie jr Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Hmmmm - where my wife works a married man who was having an affair wish a co-worker attempted to sue the company for not protecting him from her. He claimed the company did not adequately protect the men in the company from her sexual advances. This was after the affair was over and he found out that she had a number of affairs with other men prior to their affair. That would be called Sexual Harrassment. Link to post Share on other sites
Gwyneth Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Unfortunately though, people take advantage of sexual harassment both ways. It's sad when someone doesn't get their way with another person, they will claim that person harassed them. Or, if they're hurt by that person, then all of the sudden it's harassment. Sad, really, what this world has come to. Every time I turn around, someone is being sued or suing for some stupid reason. What ever happened to civily solving problems? Every thing is about money always.. Link to post Share on other sites
pollywag Posted October 26, 2007 Share Posted October 26, 2007 Unfortunately though, people take advantage of sexual harassment both ways. It's sad when someone doesn't get their way with another person, they will claim that person harassed them. Or, if they're hurt by that person, then all of the sudden it's harassment. Sad, really, what this world has come to. Every time I turn around, someone is being sued or suing for some stupid reason. What ever happened to civily solving problems? Every thing is about money always.. Exactly. People also take advantage of situations as in the case of a revealed cheater. For example sometimes when cheaters are faced with having to come clean to their spouses and are faced with having to lose everything they will go to great lengths to try and prove that they were saught out and that they were the victims in the affair. Some betrayed spouses may fall for that crap but try to sell the courts on that, don't think so. I am sure a lot of money would be spent by the courts trying to get to the bottom of all those cases. Not to mention how many h/w would team up just to take the OP to the cleaners. In fact it would be great for recovering marriages of affairs, they can team up to make the marriage better and also end up with some extra cash for their new life together. what a bunch of hogwash, would never fly. You can't have a system that only punishes one side of a criminal pair's action, it's bound to be a criminal act in and of itself. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts