Re:Elizabeth Holmes representing herself in Arizona civil case
by gnicholas on Monday January 27, 2020 @11:58PM
(#22166596)
Yeah, I don't think you're getting what I'm saying either.
My point is that this is a very untrustworthy person who is currently being sued and will likely be sued again, marrying a person who is super wealthy. This is clearly a situation where an ironclad prenup is warranted.
As to the specific legal/financial implications: if she continues to lie about things in her civil or criminal trials, she could end up incurring further liabilities — during the marriage — that could put marital property at risk. Or she could defraud other people, again putting marital property at risk. It would be a good idea to cordon off as much as possible to keep it from being attachable by her current/future creditors.
But honestly, I have no idea why anyone would take issue with my original comment: The dude needed a prenup, he probably paid a lot, and it was probably worth it. Why pick nits?
And I say this as a (former) lawyer, who appreciates nuance and getting things right.
My point is that this is a very untrustworthy person who is currently being sued and will likely be sued again, marrying a person who is super wealthy. This is clearly a situation where an ironclad prenup is warranted.
As to the specific legal/financial implications: if she continues to lie about things in her civil or criminal trials, she could end up incurring further liabilities — during the marriage — that could put marital property at risk. Or she could defraud other people, again putting marital property at risk. It would be a good idea to cordon off as much as possible to keep it from being attachable by her current/future creditors.
But honestly, I have no idea why anyone would take issue with my original comment: The dude needed a prenup, he probably paid a lot, and it was probably worth it. Why pick nits?
And I say this as a (former) lawyer, who appreciates nuance and getting things right.