Posted on 09/10/2010 5:56:33 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
GREENVILLE, NC- A record making judgment has been made in a Pitt County Court. The woman who broke up a North Carolina couple's marriage has to pay $5.8 million. This is the second largest judgment ever made under the alienation of affection law. Judges are laying down the law, and we're seeing more of these multi-million dollar judgments being made.
When they moved to Greenville, she was a radiologist and he retired from the army. They took vows to love, honor, and obey, but when she was several months pregnant and her husband's former high school classmate came to visit-- his vows went out the window.
“She came down and helped my client paint her nursery and in the process she helped herself to my client's husband,” Cynthia Mills of Mills & Bryant.
She represented Lynn Arcara in the alienation of affection case she took to trial against Susan Pecoraro, a woman she once called her friend.
(Excerpt) Read more at 2.wnct.com ...
I never took stats. All I know is she has not solved her issues. What is beyond me is how she is able to find man after man after man to seriously date and even (obviously 4 times anyway) wed her. And, as if you can’t guess... #1 was the best in the bunch.
You know what, I was coming back to this thread to doublecheck something and just saw this post. For some reason I missed it before. I’d like to comment since I think it’s important. You said that the onus is on the one doing the tempting which is why this tort exists - to be able to sue the tempter. Well, this is very similar to the liberal stuff about hate crimes or some way-out-there stuff I’m even hearing about penalizing people who “might” do a crime.
What I’d really like to know is how does one prove who is tempting who? People make eye contact so who is at fault. A lot of times, the “other woman” might be giving a man THE look but who walks over to her and buys her a drink? It could be the man, so he is inviting temptation. God gives everyone a chance to turn away. Like I said before, nobody involved in an affair is innocent so I find it very interesting when people try to heap all the blame on the person who is outside the marriage. Nobody has once talked about a man invading a marriage by cheating on the wife. Everyone on this thread keeps talking about women.
I assume you are a man, Dr. Sivana. Maybe you are a woman, but I am always amazed how two women will scratch each others’ eyes out over some man while the man gets off scott-free.
Men are weak and driven by animal instincts?
You’re thinking of Democrats.
Good post, Mamzelle.
Since when does the "other woman" get all the blame? She doesn't get any at all. Seems to me that she gets all the prizes and celebrations, while the honest wife gets dumped on. Look at McCain's first wife, Julia Robert's husband's first wife, Elizabeth Edwards... Frankly, when I first "went off" on Sanford's Argentine prostitute all the FR guys lined up to make excuses for her, mostly on the "not guilty" meme. (She's too hot to be guilty) She looked hardly better than the cheapest porn queen to me. And the damage she did to so many people was incredible...just hearing the jeers of liberals at Sanford's sanctimony was enraging.
I got arguments that suggested somehow that the woman was not to be held to any moral standard at all, like she was mentally defective, underage, etc. As a woman, that's insulting. Women are adults, and when they destroy a family they're just plain low-down immoral cats in heat.
Mark Sanford really didn't mind seeing his good wife humiliated, his children made to look ridiculous, his party made into fools, his conservative supporters like hypocritical idiots...but he really, really would have minded his skanky tramp dragged out and put in the stockade...
I hold my vows in similar stead. I love my husband way too much to ever hurt him in any way. It’d kill me.
Perfect muslim logic. Men can’t control themselves, wrap those women in a burka.
Why all the assumptions>?
Married men have been known to leave off wedding rings and lie to unsuspecting women. Of course, there are women who for ego reasons or other neurotic reasons want to bed a married man or cause havoc and trouble.
It bears repeating. Short of rape, adultery is a two way street. Two people. Both equally guilty. In some ways, the married party’s sin is more grievous because vows were spoken (at least if it was a religious union). If there are children involved, all the worse.
I think you and I agree on the point that adultery is very serious - it destroys lives and families and undermines society. As a society, we should frown on it and it should not be glorified. Yet, television and the movies are filled with adultery that shows no consequences. I think that’s our real problem.
Well, a wife might say that but in reality what one sees is the two women fighting it out. Just watch Judge Judy and you’ll see case after case of all these girls keying other girls’ cars, beating up girls, getting in cat fights, etc. because the other girl cheated with their “man.” So much for killing the man. I love Judy and she has said it over and over again, “Why don’t you go after the idiot boyfriend?”
LOL!!! Ladyjane that is the best comment on this entire thread.
A lot of people did rip on Rielle. She is hated. The “other woman” is very often held in low regard. Just because our media has a love affair with sin, don’t think the rest of the world thinks it is okay. In fact, in reality, the “other woman” is scorned more frequently than not. If it’s the “other man” you just never hear about it. Keep in mind that a good number of adulterous relationships are between parties who are both married, so both are breaking their vows. Of course, in today’s secular society, true vows are often not even taken. People write up silly little promises to each other that sometimes end up meaning very little.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.