GT Fundraiser Sweepstakes! Over $25,000 in Prizes!
GT is once again holding a fundraiser sweepstakes. We have some truly outstanding prizes to offer, including a Tactical Rifles M-40 .308 rifle,
Two custom AR-15's, with Black Rain lowers, Addax Tactical uppers and some great optics, a custom AR with an AR-5.7 5.7mmX28mm upper and a Black Rain lower, two Scottsdale Gun Club Custom Glocks, 3 other NIB Glocks, two custom 10/22 rifles, a new Mini-14 Ranch rifle and much, much more.Click Here For More Information
Sportscaster Jim Nantz must pay ex-wife $916,000 a year
HARTFORD, Conn.—CBS sportscaster Jim Nantz must pay $916,000 yearly in alimony and child support to his ex-wife and give up their Connecticut home under terms of a newly issued divorce decree.
The ruling, made Monday in Bridgeport Superior Court, dissolves the 26-year marriage of Nantz and Ann-Lorraine “Lorrie” Carlsen Nantz.
It comes after both testified about the breakdown of their marriage; Judge Howard Owens concluded neither was at fault. Nantz, described by Owens as
“our nation’s most prominent sportscaster,” filed for divorce last year from his wife after years of marriage counseling, according to the decree.
Although Nantz, 50, acknowledged he started dating a 29-year-old woman before the divorce was final, the judge concluded the marriage deteriorated years earlier and “this remote event in no way contributed to the breakdown of the marriage.”
Owens noted that the couple didn’t share the same interests in Nantz’s television career, which required frequent travel as the network’s primary commentator for college football, golf and basketball, as well as appearances at charity events.
“In fairness, for most of the years he prioritized his family obligation and put his wife and daughter Caroline first. As frequently happens in marriages of lengthy duration, the parties do not have the same interest and ardor for their spouses’ endeavors,” the judge wrote in his decision. Under the ruling, Nantz must pay $72,000 in alimony monthly until he dies or his ex-wife remarries, and another $1,000 weekly in child support for the next two years.
Nantz’s attorney, Gaetano Ferro of New Canaan, said Tuesday that the famed sportscaster only wants what’s best for his daughter and will not fight the terms of the divorce decree.
“He always wanted a peaceful resolution of an unfortunate situation,” Ferro said. “He never wanted a trial, never wanted it to come out this way, never wanted a public spectacle. He wants to put it behind him.”
Lorrie Nantz will get their home and a separate condominium in Westport, while Jim Nantz will get their home in Houston and a luxury condominium in the Deer Valley ski resort in Park City, Utah. They were awarded joint custody of Caroline, 15. He also must pay Caroline’s college expenses until she reaches 23 years old and has to split various joint accounts with Lorrie Nantz, including the current value of his pension through the Screen Actors Guild.
He also must keep his ex-wife listed as beneficiary of a $3 million life insurance policy while he’s still paying alimony and/or child support, and pay $70,000 so she can join any country club of her choice.
She had been seeking more than $1.5 million in yearly alimony and child support.
Court documents cited Jim Nantz’s $3.2 million salary from CBS and other assets, including millions in other income, shared investment accounts, real estate and other property.
Nantz, who started his broadcast career at a local CBS affiliate in Salt Lake City, testified that Lorrie Nantz grew uninterested in his career over time, did not want to attend events that were important to him and didn’t provide the emotional support he desired.
Lorrie Nantz said she went as often as possible, but that those events were not her life’s major interest and her main focus was raising their daughter.
“They’re two good people, and as sometimes happens over 26 years, they grew apart,” Ferro said.
Cynthia George, Lorrie Nantz’s Greenwich-based attorney, said she and her client had no comment except that they were pleased with the decision.
Owens noted that the couple didn’t share the same interests in Nantz’s television career, which required frequent travel as the network’s primary commentator for college football, golf and basketball, as well as appearances at charity events.
Then why should she share the $ he makes from it?
No woman is worth $72K a year. Especially if she's living in YOUR house doing the monkey dance with other men. And she will be. And laughing.
I've seen cops sleeping in locker rooms because their biweekly takehome was less than $20 due to court ordered deductions.
__________________
"Certainly there is no hunting like the hunting of man and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never really care for anything else thereafter." Ernest Hemingway
No woman is worth $72K a year. Especially if she's living in YOUR house doing the monkey dance with other men. And she will be. And laughing.
Judge should be beaten in public.
The judge should be beaten (a little extreme??) because Jim didn't get a pre-nup or live outside of "community property" or whatever?
Like has been mentioned, Jim ain't gonna be hurting for cash (he makes nearly $7 million a year), his daughter is well provided for, and he has a gal 21-years his junior. No big deal.
__________________ TOP GUN 357SIG, Florida Glocker Clubs member #420 OD G32, straight stock (so far)
Former model Stephanie Seymour divorced Peter Brant(they lived in Greenwich, CT), and she was awarded $270k a month. Her ex makes over $1.5M every month.
Quote:
Brant's assets and expenses
*
The divorce case of newsprint magnate Peter Brant, of Greenwich, reveals:*
$490 million in assets
$1.552 million monthly net income
Owns 200-acre White Birch Farm in Greenwich
Farm has professional polo team
House styled after George Washington's Mount Vernon
Has two other multimillion-dollar homes, one in Sagaponack, N.Y., and the other in Palm Beach, Fla.
Has a staff of seven in their home and another 15 work the farm
Spends about $30,000 a month on household supplies, which he states may be anything from "toothpaste to towels."*
Donates $216,000 a month to the Brant Foundation, which maintains an art museum across the street from farm.
Will give his divorced wife -- former Victoria's Secret model Stephanie Seymour -- $270,000 a month in alimony and support for their three children.
*
__________________
Planning a Disney World Vacation?
6BR/4Bath house for rent.
Visit www.marksrentals.com for more info.
It's $72K/MONTH!!! And you are absolutely right, no woman is worth it. That's why I will never re-marry.
Yup, same here. I consider myself to have gotten off pretty lucky. At least I'm now in financial recovery and still young enough to be able to make up for the damage. And the mutt doesn't see one thin dime of my retirement.
Getting married these days is just stupid without a pre-nup and an exit strategy.
Under the ruling, Nantz must pay $72,000 in alimony monthly until he dies or his ex-wife remarries, and another $1,000 weekly in child support for the next two years.
In reference to an NBA player who recently got married, one pundit wrote: "If, on divorce, she is truly deserving of half [the player's] salary, then why aren't the Lakers paying her right now?"
That points out the absurdity of this 50/50 split. Why should a woman get half a man's salary (potentially until his death) merely because she played roommate and cooked some meals.
Once the marriage is over she is doing absolutely NOTHING to deserve any compensation, other than the role of Nanny if the kids aren't grown. I'm 100% for child support (provided the father has equal rights of visitation.) I am 100% against alimony. I hear these women make noise about "I sacrificed my career so he would succeed." Hogwash. I worked in a pretty intense profession -- as an attorney. Some of my collegues were married, some were not. Those that succeeded did it ON THEIR OWN MERITS and not because of their wives (or husbands). Some of the MOST successful lawyers were single.
If women really want to be treated as equals, the first thing they should do is renounce the alimony system. It is crazy the way it's applied today -- as it encourages women to marry for money, and to divorce for Mo' Money a few years later.
As the women gets older and fatter and grumpier and all around less fun to be with, she can just ask for a no-fault divorce and collect "money fo' nothin".
Any man with a decent salary or career potential would be absolutely insane to NOT get a pre-nup.
__________________
So you want accuracy? Is ten shots in 4" at 1000yards good enough? Check this out: http://www.AccurateShooter.com
Ok, so would a woman who had kids have put herself in a less financially advantageous position by raising a family instead of being Ms. Career woman?
In general I agree with you, the system is fraked, it's basically evolved into a Marxist devise to redistribute wealth and/or punish men. I certainly don't think that an athlete's wife should be given half his money because she got to live like a princess for however many years, what has she done to earn that money?
If she has kids however, she puts a bit of a beating on her body, decreasing her worth, and she then has kids, decreasing her worth, and has probably taken time out of whatever career she was in, decreasing her worth. So, I think she should probably be compensated a bit for that, but these numbers being thrown around are crazy.
Home Defense: 
Fat chance of that happening.
Linear Mode
