PDA

View Full Version : CBS sportscaster Nantz ordered to pay $1M in alimony, child support


HEAV
11-03-2009, 11:26 PM
CBS sportscaster Jim Nantz will have to pay his estranged wife nearly $1 million a year in alimony and child support, a Superior Court judge ruled Monday.

While Judge Howard Owens states in a nine-page decision that a large part of testimony before him by Nantz and his wife, Lorrie, related to faults for the breakdown of their 26-year-old marriage, he ruled the conduct of either party was far from “egregious.” “While there was some testimony of the husband’s interest in another woman in the few short months preceding the filing of this dissolution action, the breakdown occurred years before this relationship developed and the court finds this remote event in no way contributed to the breakdown of the marriage,” the judge stated. “The court finds neither party at fault for the breakdown of the marriage,” he added.

Owens ordered Nantz to pay his now-former wife $72,000 monthly in alimony until either his death or she remarries. He will pay her $1,000 a week in child support for their 15-year-old daughter, Caroline, for the next two years. He will also be solely responsible for paying her college expenses until she turns 23. – Connecticut Post

zowie!

Damn!

lazarus4444
11-03-2009, 11:28 PM
dude must be making bank!

Bronco Warrior
11-03-2009, 11:43 PM
Damn! The one time I met him in '92 I didn't know he was married (Was in a Stip Bar with my buddy Lee Olerton who was the TD (Technical Director) for the Jazz Broadcasts and he introduced me. He was trying to get one of the Girls to hang out with him after the broadcast lol!

Vegas_Bronco
11-03-2009, 11:45 PM
Maybe one of you can be her sugar daddy...opportunity knocks.

broncocalijohn
11-04-2009, 12:23 AM
Damn! The one time I met him in '92 I didn't know he was married (Was in a Stip Bar with my buddy Lee Olerton who was the TD (Technical Director) for the Jazz Broadcasts and he introduced me. He was trying to get one of the Girls to hang out with him after the broadcast lol!

thank god you name drop because we would have no clue who your buddy Lee is. BTW, does he know your famous quote about Korean food smelling like a fart?

bpc
11-04-2009, 01:12 AM
Oh Jim. When will you learn. It's cheaper to keep her!!!!

tsiguy96
11-04-2009, 01:26 AM
it is ridiculous guys are forced to pay that much, regardless of income.

RMT
11-04-2009, 08:22 AM
just goes to show that men are almost always the one screwed and we all should think long and hard about ever getting married or even having kids.

i pay $1400/month for 2 kids - that's a lot for a teacher. but nantz's arrangement makes me feel a LITTLE better.

Bronco Rob
11-04-2009, 08:26 AM
zowie!

Mr.Meanie
11-04-2009, 08:50 AM
I read one of the news stories was that they grew estranged partly because she didn't like how his business interests kept him tied up... but she apparantly didn't mind the money it generated.

ColoradoBuff
11-04-2009, 08:58 AM
pics?

Tombstone RJ
11-04-2009, 10:15 AM
I think the judge went way overboard. Let me just say this: Jim Nantz, your lawyer sucks.

bronco militia
11-04-2009, 10:27 AM
Owens ordered Nantz to pay his now-former wife $72,000 monthly in alimony until either his death or she remarries.

thats just flat out criminal!

but the law is the law....wtf!

Meck77
11-04-2009, 10:31 AM
Oh Jim. When will you learn. It's cheaper to keep her!!!!

Better yet don't get married.

TexanBob
11-04-2009, 10:43 AM
Between salary, speaking engagements, book sales, etc. Nantz' estimated earnings are $7 million per year so, as a percentage of his income, he probably came out better than most guys in his alimony judgement and I'm sure he had a better lawyer than most guys going through a divorce and is paying a hefty sum to that lawyer.

The problem for Nantz comes later when his earnings level off. He'll need to go back and try to have the judgement reduced but, for now, that's not an outlandish amount for someone of his wealth to pay.

I feel worse for divorced men who are asked to cough up 70-80 percent or more of their salary for alimony and child support which doesn't go down if he gets laid off or has to take a cut in pay.

DrFate
11-04-2009, 11:35 AM
Why is she entitled to anything? Tell the wench to get a freakin' job...

Tombstone RJ
11-04-2009, 01:00 PM
Between salary, speaking engagements, book sales, etc. Nantz' estimated earnings are $7 million per year so, as a percentage of his income, he probably came out better than most guys in his alimony judgement and I'm sure he had a better lawyer than most guys going through a divorce and is paying a hefty sum to that lawyer.

The problem for Nantz comes later when his earnings level off. He'll need to go back and try to have the judgement reduced but, for now, that's not an outlandish amount for someone of his wealth to pay.

I feel worse for divorced men who are asked to cough up 70-80 percent or more of their salary for alimony and child support which doesn't go down if he gets laid off or has to take a cut in pay.

His attorney still sucks. She get's $72k a month for the rest of her life or until she remarries?

That's BS.

His income could crash and he'd still have to shell out that kind of money?

Nah, no way.

Maybe she gets that for like 10 years, but not for her entire life.

manchambo
11-04-2009, 01:01 PM
Between salary, speaking engagements, book sales, etc. Nantz' estimated earnings are $7 million per year so, as a percentage of his income, he probably came out better than most guys in his alimony judgement and I'm sure he had a better lawyer than most guys going through a divorce and is paying a hefty sum to that lawyer.

The problem for Nantz comes later when his earnings level off. He'll need to go back and try to have the judgement reduced but, for now, that's not an outlandish amount for someone of his wealth to pay.

I feel worse for divorced men who are asked to cough up 70-80 percent or more of their salary for alimony and child support which doesn't go down if he gets laid off or has to take a cut in pay.

If that's true, there's nothing at all wrong with this ruling. She's getting about 1/7 of his income. Big deal.

Tombstone RJ
11-04-2009, 01:12 PM
Nantz is a moron. I'd tell my lawyer (my LAW FIRM THAT IS ON MY PAYROLL) that I'll give my ex-wife alimony either for a set amount of time (10 years or so) of for a set amount of money ($10m or so) but I'm not gonna be stringed along for the next 40 years of my life making her rich for blowing some other guy. No way.

If his lawyers can't do any better than that, I'd fire them all.

bronco militia
11-04-2009, 01:14 PM
If that's true, there's nothing at all wrong with this ruling. She's getting about 1/7 of his income. Big deal.

that's easy for you to say...it's not your money
:giggle:

Garcia Bronco
11-04-2009, 01:16 PM
This Judge Owens is a scumbag. Look at this ruling...the wife cheated on the husband and he awarded her 26 million.


Record $24m awarded in divorce
DANIEL TEPFER dtepfer@ctpost.com
Updated: 01/06/2006 04:34:06 PM EST


BRIDGEPORT — A Superior Court judge Wednesday awarded a Fairfield woman a major sliver of her husband's nearly $170 million fortune following testimony that she had affairs with her rock-climbing guide and a man she met on a flight to China.
Judge Howard Owens awarded Susan Sosin $24 million from husband Howard Sosin's estimated $168 million in assets — the largest award made in a state divorce case that has gone to trial.

And while Susan Sosin, 51, gets to keep the couple's $3.6 million Manhattan apartment, $2 million Utah ski house and $800,000 home in Wallkill, N.Y., she has to vacate their two mansions on Sasco Hill Road in the Southport section of Fairfield and three desert properties in Arizona.

The Sosins live in a $16 million mansion on Sasco Hill Road, while their 14 servants live in a $5 million house up the street.

"The parties' marriage has been undeniably marred by the defendant's infidelity," the judge stated in his verdict. "Although her sexual relationship was not the sole cause of the breakdown, it did effectively terminate the marriage."

Bridgeport lawyer Richard Albrecht represented Howard Sosin, 54, who sued for the divorce.

"This is an unfortunate story of a family who, because of the husband's genius, accumulated substantial wealth and, notwithstanding all its effect, happiness eluded them," he said. "We all know money does not buy happiness, and at the end of the day this is an example of that."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to Susan Sosin's infidelity, he commented: "She fell off the edge somewhere."
Susan Sosin's lawyer, Frederick Siegel of Stamford, said he hadn't seen the judge's decision and couldn't comment on it.

Both Siegel and Albrecht confirmed that, in terms of the assets involved, the award is the largest among divorce cases that have gone to trial in state history.

And legal experts, including Gaetano Ferro, who represented the former wife of ex-General Electric magnate Jack Welch in their 2002 divorce, said the case ranks among the largest in the nation.

Among the assets Howard Sosin gets to keep are $89 million in bank accounts, 10 of the couple's 18 cars, $960,000 worth of private club memberships and $22 million in fine art.

In addition to the $24 million payment, Susan Sosin also keeps $6 million in her brokerage accounts, eight cars, and $2.9 million in jewelry, including a ruby piece her husband had bought for her but hadn't given to her prior to their divorce.

Howard Sosin in 1987 founded AIG Financial Products and served as its president and chief operating officer until 1993 when he terminated his association. Following litigation, he received a total of $182 million from AIG. In 1978, Sosin was an assistant professor at Columbia University when he met his wife-to-be. At the time, she was married to another man and working in retail.

Susan Sosin gave birth to sons in 1982 and 1986, and a daughter in 1991.

In 1992, the Sosins discovered their daughter had an acute allergy to peanuts. Howard Sosin funded a research foundation at Yale University to look for a cure for his daughter's ailment. However, in 1999, when Yale researchers had failed to find a cure, Sosin decided to establish his own pharmaceutical company, SEER LLC, to try to find a cure.

Sosin also started Feil Golf, a golf equipment company.

While Howard Sosin was engaged in business, according to trial testimony, his wife took up heli-skiing (ascending to the top of a peak via helicopter before skiing down) and rock climbing.

While rock climbing in 1996, Susan Sosin admitted in testimony she became intimate with a guide. She testified it was a spontaneous and isolated occurrence.

During a flight to China in 2000, she met a married man, and that led to a lengthy affair, according to testimony.

Howard Sosin learned of his wife's relationships in February 2003 when, during an upgrade of their computer system, he found hundreds of e-mails between his wife and her lover, according to testimony.

Daniel Tepfer, who covers state courts and law enforcement issues, can be reached at 330-6308.

Garcia Bronco
11-04-2009, 01:18 PM
I think the judge went way overboard. Let me just say this: Jim Nantz, your lawyer sucks.

It's the judge.

Beantown Bronco
11-04-2009, 01:26 PM
Nantz is a moron. I'd tell my lawyer (my LAW FIRM THAT IS ON MY PAYROLL) that I'll give my ex-wife alimony either for a set amount of time (10 years or so) of for a set amount of money ($10m or so) but I'm not gonna be stringed along for the next 40 years of my life making her rich for blowing some other guy. No way.

If his lawyers can't do any better than that, I'd fire them all.

Don't be so quick to blame the lawyers. It may not matter how good they are (and I'm sure they are good for the money he makes)

They might not have a choice. It's state law here in Massachusetts that alimony is for life (if the spouse remains unmarried). Lawyers and judges don't have any leeway. Not sure what state Nantz is a resident of, but it sounds like it is the same there.

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/special_reports/changing-the-state-alimony-laws

Garcia Bronco
11-04-2009, 01:28 PM
don't be so quick to blame the lawyers. It may not matter how good they are (and i'm sure they are good for the money he makes)

they might not have a choice. It's state law here in massachusetts that alimony is for life (if the spouse remains unmarried). Lawyers and judges don't have any leeway. Not sure what state nantz is a resident of, but it sounds like it is the same there.

http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/special_reports/changing-the-state-alimony-laws

ct

Beantown Bronco
11-04-2009, 01:30 PM
ct

CT has pretty loose alimony laws, nothing like MA, so I'd agree based off your link above....it appears to be the judge.

broncofan7
11-04-2009, 01:34 PM
In general, Alimony should be the EXCEPTION not the RULE..and alimony at this level is criminal.

Tombstone RJ
11-04-2009, 01:34 PM
MA sucks. Aside from the coast and Boston, what does it have? Martha's Swineyard? No thanks, I'll take the Tetons my friends.

Beantown Bronco
11-04-2009, 01:40 PM
MA sucks. Aside from the coast and Boston, what does it have? Martha's Swineyard? No thanks, I'll take the Tetons my friends.

Sam Adams Brewery and lots and lots of college girls.

Honorable mention goes to the fall weather and hanging out in the City of Salem around Halloween.

Tombstone RJ
11-04-2009, 01:48 PM
Sam Adams Brewery and lots and lots of college girls.

Honorable mention goes to the fall weather and hanging out in the City of Salem around Halloween.

College girls that can rape you if you marry them in MA? Hmmm... I feel your pain.

Hogan11
11-04-2009, 01:50 PM
The ruling is utter bullshat, unsurprising, but still bullshat.

TexanBob
11-04-2009, 05:55 PM
Guys, the truth of the matter is that marriage, for a man, is like committing legal suicide. The woman can clean you out like nobody's business, particularly if there are kids, and there's nothing you can do about it. Even men who have been cleared of paternity by DNA testing are still on the hook if they assume any parenting duties.

You'll know you're doing the right thing if the woman starts needling you about being "afraid to make a commitment". You damn well better be afraid. Only fools rush in.

On another board, a woman replied that "how can it be that bad for men when men write and pass all the laws?" She's right. We've done this to ourselves.

Bronco Warrior
11-04-2009, 06:01 PM
College girls that can rape you if you marry them in MA? Hmmm... I feel your pain.

A GUY's HUSBAND can rape him in MA too! Or a woman's wife..but that might be kinda fun to watch! lol. :hitself: ok that was wrong! Sorry!

Broncotilldeath
11-04-2009, 10:04 PM
That's just insane and really unfair.

strafen
11-04-2009, 10:25 PM
Owens ordered Nantz to pay his now-former wife $72,000 monthly in alimony until either his death or she remarries.

thats just flat out criminal!

but the law is the law....wtf!I don't think she'll be stupid enough to remarry. Lol!

strafen
11-04-2009, 10:26 PM
The ruling is utter bullshat, unsurprising, but still bullshat.Absolutely. That's way overboard. Nobody needs that kind of money. She must've been a vindictive bitch she went for all!

watermock
11-04-2009, 11:23 PM
I had no idea that AIG was only 22 years old!

broncocalijohn
11-05-2009, 12:34 AM
Sam Adams Brewery and lots and lots of college girls.

Honorable mention goes to the fall weather and hanging out in the City of Salem around Halloween.

you had me at Sam Adams Brewery. I swear I will go to Europe again and get to Belgium for some brewery crawls. I love beer. Beer, Beer, Beer. F Scotch!

lex
11-05-2009, 12:46 AM
Sam Adams Brewery and lots and lots of college girls.

Honorable mention goes to the fall weather and hanging out in the City of Salem around Halloween.

...and then the other 364 days of the year you have Ye Olde Pepper and The House of 7 Gables.