Comments on: Wedding Called off After Man Refuses to Agree to Pay Billionaire’s Lawyer Daughter Alimony

By: alexandra fisher | Hot Trends Right Now

alexandra fisher | Hot Trends Right Now — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:41:55 +0000

[...] of his son to Palm Beach high-society daughter Alexandra Fisher turned into a non-event, the Wedding Called off After Man Refuses to Agree to Pay Billionaire’s…: Late in the evening… Posh Palm Beach Wedding Called Off, Guests Party On: Billed as the Floridian island?s ?wedding of [...]

By: Artfldgr

Artfldgr — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:29:45 +0000

I will guess that the cost to his relationship with his daughter will be more than the cost it wold have been to him when he was dead and the money was someplace else.

what everyone is assuming is that once a billionaire always a billionaire… and so they are assuming that if something happens she will get money…

but he may blow it all in a deal, have nothing left, and then what?

however, its none of his business… his business is whether he wants to give it away or not… or how… not in setting up rules that make giving it one way ok, and rules that say anotehr way etc. if that was the case, then he could have attached those rules to the will and we would ahve had the plot for a famous buster keaton movie.

however, he tried to add a rider to a contract that he is not a party to. in fact, he had no real authority to stop the wedding, and the poor bride and groom didnt have to listen to him at all…

i will guarantee that a few years from now… his daugter will no longer be talking to him… and then he will sit there, and say… “which was worth more.. the money i have after i am dead, of the love, respect, and commiseration of my daughter, her family, and grandchildren”

if he is still happy then… then he did the right thing (for him).

By: Robert Stevens

Robert Stevens — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:00:12 +0000

The men in this country are beginning to smarten up! A prenuptial to a marriage is like flying with a parachute. It is a sign the bride had ulterior motives, she wants to be paid reguardless if she honors the agreement( marriage) or not. As far as the father is concerned,I think he is behind this little atempt at extortion. Smart move man, never marry a woman unless you can have some protection. It a) will deter any thought of divorce b) it will protect all you have worked for if she is not detered
I doubt if I will every legally marry again, quite frankly the legal agreement that marriage constitute in todays enviroment is not worth the paper it is written on. women today are socially, legally and morally irresponsible, they have been led to beleive equality is all goodies and benefits, that the drawbacks somehow do not appy to them. Now the legal system is a total fraud, stay away from it. If you have to deal with it, then deal with it from a distance. Always have some protection Postion your affairs so that they can’t get very much from you and even that will be very expensive for them. That folks is the only thing that will make women and the legal system that has supported them act reasonable. That is the only thing that will make them respect your rights. They can never be trusted to do the right thing, they have gotten away with doing wrong for so long they believe they have a right to act that way. So they have to be made to act right.

By: poiuyt

poiuyt — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 14:29:32 +0000

In the good old days when for better or for worse meant something, a father in law had no problem making an even richer man of his son in law. And a prospective husband had no problems committing his financial future unconditionally to a prospective wife.

But society has moved on and become much more dishonest and more cynical in matters to do with personal relationships. Wether or not to agree to a compatible marriage nowadays has been replaced by the question of how much more will a spouses life be materially enriched for free. Enriched for free that is, on account of their gender if they divorce after marriage ?

Elisabeth Hurley the British thespian was able to squeeze millions in child support amounts not out of Steve Bing, her sons father, but from Steve Bings billionaire parents. That is, from trust fund monies held for Steve Bings benefit.

Lionel Richie, the American performing artist was successfully sued by his ex-wife and step-kid for millions in alimoney and child support. Child support, that is, for the originally fatherless bastard, Nichole Richie. A Nichole whom was not even Lionels own daughter but taken on by himself as a humane gesture at the ex-wifes insistence.

The naked dancer Anna Nochole Smith was found by American courts, to be more entitled to a deceased Billionaires fortune than the Billionaires own legitimate sons. And on account of Anna Nicholes bastard son, the original court ruling is being used by other unscrupulous people to lodge vicarious claims for child alimoney on the estate of the deceased billionaire.

So you cannot really fault a Billionaire father in law, nor a well of son in law, for trying to work out in calculus their financial risk exposure from any prospective nupitals or marriage. Females have been enprostituted by this society into a species of entitled victim-parrasite, against whom males as fathers or husbands must take serious precautions.

By: amfortas

amfortas — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:47:30 +0000

Money can’t buy class.

The Ali-money is for arse.

By: rastus

rastus — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:43:08 +0000

Sounds to me as though the Saturday article was written to correct the bogus claim made in Friday’s article. If indeed Fisher had falsely represented to others that Bailer was the one who wanted alimony, there could be a slander suit against Fisher, and a possible libel action against the paper for printing it without having made any attempt to ascertain the truth of the matter. Setting the record straight gets the paper off the hook.

By: BobH

BobH — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:48:00 +0000

Then, there’s this account, also in the Palm Beach Post and by the same author, which somewhat contradicts the other article:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2008/01/13/a2a_josecol_0113.html

What I want to know is: Why two articles by the same author in the same newspaper?????

By: BobH

BobH — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:11:36 +0000

According to this source:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2008/01/11/a2a_josecol_0111.html?imw=Y

the important part of the story is a bit different:

“A source at the wedding overheard Fisher, who last year sold his hotel company, Innkeepers, for $1.5 billion, complain that Bailer wanted lifelong alimony if they divorced. Fisher wanted him to sign without such a clause, and Bailer balked.”

By: mdkn1

mdkn1 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:19:40 +0000

Well Done !
What was the reason to get married anyway ?

By: jaz

jaz — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:37:51 +0000

Telltale Signs Your New Girlfriend May be psycho.
http://www.themishmash.com/2008/01/telltale-signs.html

By: BobH

BobH — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:28:36 +0000

So who was the driving force behind the last-minute “negotiations” – the bride or her father? It sounds as if it was the father. It’ll be interesting to see if the bride and groom get back together.

I just hope that the bride’s father paid for the wedding expenses.

By: Virtue

Virtue — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:25:03 +0000

Hard lesson but well don Sir.

By: donnieboy57

donnieboy57 — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:17:03 +0000

cackle cackle cackle…..

By: PolishKnight

PolishKnight — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:52:18 +0000

Looks like the groom dodged a bullet. I’ve been there…