NY Times: No Alimony Payments for McGreevey

[marmar]

No Alimony Payments for McGreevey
By MITCHELL L. BLUMENTHAL
Published: August 8, 2008



A judge ruled on Friday that former Gov. James E. McGreevey of New Jersey, who resigned from office after admitting that he had an affair with a male aide, will not have to pay alimony to his former wife.

The ruling by State Superior Court Judge Karen Cassidy granting Mr. McGreevey and his wife, Dina Matos, a divorce ended a frayed eight-year marriage that came apart when the governor stunned the state by announcing on national television that he was “a gay American.”

“No alimony — that’s what I’m talking about,” Mr. McGreevey’s lawer, Stephen Haller, said moments after the decision was read in court, the Star-Ledger of Newark reported on its Web site.

In addition to ruling out the payment of $2,500-a-month in alimony for four months that Ms. Matos was seeking, Judge Cassidy ordered Mr. McGreevey to pay $1,075 a month in child support for their daughter rather than the $1,750 she wanted.

In the stunning decision, which came in the aftermath of a bitter and very public court battle, Ms. Matos was told that she would receive none of the proceeds from Mr. McGreevey’s book, “The Confession,” which described his version of events that led to his resignation in August 2004.

Not long after Mr. McGreevey’s book was published, Ms. Matos came out with her own book about the mariage entitled “Silent Partner.”

The couple will share share custody of their daughter, 6. ........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/09/nyregion/09mcgreevey.html

[Midlodemocrat]

1. I read that this morning and I have to say...I am

more than a little surprised. It wouldn't have killed him to help her out a bit more financially after he humiliated her like he did.

[dsc]

2. It sounds like she got the shaft

[rebel with a cause]

3. Doesn't surprise me.

No matter how much men cry that the courts are more on the woman's side during the divorce, it is not often the case. I think sometimes it just depends on who the people are, who their lawyers are, and who the judge is.

I know in my case, the judge was an older man (about to retire from the bench) and he definately gave my husband the breaks in our case simply because he demanded more of me because I was a woman. At least that is why I thought he did. Also, my then husband had friends that had connections. Well, I got through it okay, didn't ask my ex for anything, and they (his friends) ended up having to deal with him (my ex) without me there to keep him out of trouble. I always felt like the last laugh was on them. ;shrug: