Sharia law ban and Muslim wives

[decocker 7,198]

If a woman barely knows a much older man, agrees to marriage and moves to another country to be with said man, after signing a contract worth close to 700K, she might just be a gold digger. Especially since the alleged honeymoon phase ended so shortly.

if that man agreed to the contract and imported said gold digger - then dude gets what's coming to him.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

if that man agreed to the contract and imported said gold digger - then dude gets what's coming to him.

Shhhhhh.... you're not allowed to say that sort of thing on VJ!

Edited February 21, 2013 by the maven

[^_^ 5,021]

2 years of marriage and 677K? Uh, no. That's some bullsh1t.

[decocker 7,198]

[quote name=' timestamp='1361482244' post='5995411]

2 years of marriage and 677K? Uh, no. That's some bullsh1t.

if the guy signed a contract for that amount but didn't detail a prerequisite length of marriage, i mean, expensive mistake but pay up.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

[quote name=' timestamp='1361482244' post='5995411]

2 years of marriage and 677K? Uh, no. That's some bullsh1t.

You can contract for whatever you wish.* Had this been a prenuptial agreement, or other agreement between the spouses, would you call it BS? If it were along the lines of, "I, Mr. X, agree that I will pay Miss Q the sum of $677,000 for early termination of the contract," and the contract was a contract for, say, Miss Q's personal appearance with Mr. X at social events, would you object to such an early termination clause?

Why do you hate America?

Edit to add: with certain restrictions, of course (e.g. no contracts for slavery, illegal contracts, etc.)

Edited February 21, 2013 by the maven

[^_^ 5,021]

You can contract for whatever you wish. Had this been a prenuptial agreement, or other agreement between the spouses, would you call it BS? If it were along the lines of, "I, Mr. X, agree that I will pay Miss Q the sum of $677,000 for early termination of the contract," and the contract was a contract for, say, Miss Q's personal appearance with Mr. X at social events, would you object to such an early termination clause?

Why do you hate America?

Unlike you, I'm no lawyer so forgive me if what I'm saying is legally incorrect (it probably is) but don't courts routinely throw out "contracts" that are unreasonable? If I sign a contract promising to pay you $50,000 to clean my 1500 sq foot house one time, is there a court in the country that will enforce it?

[decocker 7,198]

plus, one cannot put a price on the sacrifice of youth and beauty sleeping with old man balls.

[^_^ 5,021]

plus, one cannot put a price on the sacrifice of youth and beauty sleeping with old man balls.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

[quote name=' timestamp='1361482816' post='5995437]

Unlike you, I'm no lawyer so forgive me if what I'm saying is legally incorrect (it probably is) but don't courts routinely throw out "contracts" that are unreasonable? If I sign a contract promising to pay you $50,000 to clean my 1500 sq foot house one time, is there a court in the country that will enforce it?

Yes. As long as there was offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations, and consideration, and everybody's capable of entering the contract, you're golden. Consideration doesn't have to be what you or I think is reasonable, it just has to exist. You can sell a home for a peppercorn, as long as the parties agree that the peppercorn is the price.

[^_^ 5,021]

"offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations, and consideration"

what? english please!

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

[quote name=' timestamp='1361483509' post='5995465]

"offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations, and consideration"

what? english please!

Here's caveman:

BOB: I have a rock for sale. It costs 3 peppercorns.

JOHN: I want to buy your rock and I accept your offer to sell it for 3 peppercorns.

Bob and John intend that the purchase is binding -- Bob can't take it back, and John can't claim he doesn't have the rock.

John pays Bob 3 peppercorns for the rock.

~FINIS~

[JoBri 548]

I so often see where other countries do not do things the way we do them in the USA, and yes with laws to, and we are told to respect and accept it, its their country. So where is the same respect and acceptance to American law? This woman knew she was coming to America, this woman knew a different country would have different laws.

I'm sorry, but I can't see anything wrong with what the court did. States that do ignore our own laws to accept the laws of other countries in other countries are just wrong in my view. More states should be passing a law like Kansas has to keep out consideration of foreign laws in the USA. She was moving to the USA, she was getting the advantages of being in the USA and its laws, but then wants to cherry pick the most helpful parts of her home countries laws.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Brijo

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Yes. As long as there was offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations, and consideration, and everybody's capable of entering the contract, you're golden. Consideration doesn't have to be what you or I think is reasonable, it just has to exist. You can sell a home for a peppercorn, as long as the parties agree that the peppercorn is the price.

pfff please, if the signed document had said she gets absolute zero and he gets everything you would have a completely different argument. You know it. So would everyone else here.

[sandinista! 1,816]

Whoops, looks like that would be an illegal contract, that her comment already disclaimed, due to it being in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Whoops, looks like that would be an illegal contract, that her comment already disclaimed, due to it being in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.

Yep. There needs to be consideration.

Edit: court-ordered marital settlements are a different animal altogether.

Edited February 22, 2013 by the maven