Comments on Dodger Divorce: Frank's side of the post-nup story.

I don't buy the argument that Jamie started fi...

2009-11-14T20:44:30.096-08:00

I don't buy the argument that Jamie started fighting for a new post nup agreement, because she was freaking out about the division of assets. She had over $152 million in prime real estate, in which she probably used to open some crazy lines of credit. I do think either Frank or Jamie has some weird behavior problems if they are buying houses next door at obscene prices.

Okojo-- Maybe so, but she probably can't pick...

2009-11-13T10:21:39.025-08:00

Okojo--

Maybe so, but she probably can't pick and choose at this point. If the goal of the agreement was to shield the assets from creditors...well, isn't she a de facto creditor now? The fact that there was an unintended consequence is probably relevant only as far as that consequence is completely unforeseeable. To me, she (or one of her lawyers) were just oblivious to the

Frank and Jamie McCourt's post nup agreement i...

2009-11-12T20:43:25.705-08:00

Frank and Jamie McCourt's post nup agreement in 2004 is what many Real Estate Developers do to protect their residential assets from creditors. It makes financial sense so there is some protection if one of their business declares bankruptcy.

The thing that perplexes me, is why Jamie is feigning ignorance on the 2004 post nup, and pushing for a new post nup since 2007, which

Mike--maybe. And you hold that thought, too. Life ...

2009-11-12T12:14:43.405-08:00

Mike--maybe. And you hold that thought, too. Life intervenes at the moment, but I'll get something up later.

It definitely seems that the McCourt's probabl...

2009-11-12T11:51:21.922-08:00

It definitely seems that the McCourt's probably lived a very levered lifestyle and that Frank's businesses were volatile and most likely had his personal guarantee tied to them. I don't think this transfer of assets had so much to do with moving to a community property state as it does with the fact that the Dodgers were bought for basically no money down and a big chunk of short term

It does not. But hold that thought, and check back...

2009-11-12T10:41:06.239-08:00

It does not. But hold that thought, and check back later today.

To me it sounds as if their agreement was made wit...

2009-11-12T09:39:34.519-08:00

To me it sounds as if their agreement was made with the purpose of, if not defrauding, at least playing games with, potential creditors of Frank's who otherwise would have recourse to the properties which the McCourts tried to shield by placing in Jamie's name. If that is true, does it give Jamie grounds to challenge the validity of the agreement even thugh she had a hand in the

Thanks for taking the time to provide a little ins...

2009-11-12T07:58:04.053-08:00

Thanks for taking the time to provide a little insight into this sordid mess. Much appreciated. Keep it up!