Post: #1

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/suns/art...vorce.html

Steve nash made sure his wife sign a pre-nup three days before wedding.....looks like that is paying off now.

After five years he is divorcing his wife who he had three kids with.

He plans to give only short term spousal support and long term child support.

A win for men.

Post: #2

Signed three days before the wedding? Bad move. If the wife has a competent attorney he/she will argue it was signed under duress and thus unenforceable or voidable.

Post: #3

by Craig Harris - Dec. 21, 2010 12:00 AM

Post: #4

(12-04-2012 11:57 PM)Menace Wrote:  Signed three days before the wedding? Bad move. If the wife has a competent attorney he/she will argue it was signed under duress and thus unenforceable or voidable.

Cue merenguero but I believe there is case law, stating that as long as full disclosure of finances and assets is made, terms are explained, and she is given the opportunity or choice to obtain counsel it will not be considered duress. See Simeone v. Simeone (supreme court case where husband presented pre nup night before wedding). Ignoratia non excusat. Emphasis added.

Post: #5

If both parties are represented by counsel (and they probably were in this case) the way pre-nups are usually set aside is if either the agreement is not freely and voluntarily entered into (i.e. duress) or there was not a full and frank disclosure of assets. She very well may claim that Steve Nash told her that if she didn't sign the agreement the wedding was off and that it wasn't voluntary. That argument may be sufficient to get the agreement set aside. There are no slam dunks in the law. What vrry well may happen is that both sides will realize the risk involved with Steve Nash attempting to enforce the agreement and he will agree to pay her an amount which is more than is required by the agreement, but less than she would be entitled to in the event that the agreement were deemed invalid. A good settlement is one where both sides are somwhat unhappy.

Post: #6

She'll still get some rolled into child support (no way it's going to be just 1-2k per child a month), but still. Good thinking from him!

Post: #7

So instead of losing 15-25% of his future income, he's losing 10-15%?

Post: #8

He divorced her the day after his son was born... im guessing the baby might not have looked like him.

Post: #9

What do you know... his wife was supposedly sleeping with his teammate Jason Richardson. I'm guessing the baby was black although I haven't searched for pictures.

Post: #10

(12-05-2012 04:49 AM)lavidaloca Wrote:  What do you know... his wife was supposedly sleeping with his teammate Jason Richardson. I'm guessing the baby was black although I haven't searched for pictures.

Kid, looks white to me.



If the divorce was soely on the grounds of her bringing back a souvenir from her visits to the darkside, then why in the holy fuck would it even be a topic of discussion that Nash would be paying her anything outside of "twin-support"!?

There's gotta be more to it than what's being printed.

Post: #11

(12-04-2012 11:57 PM)Menace Wrote:  Signed three days before the wedding? Bad move. If the wife has a competent attorney he/she will argue it was signed under duress and thus unenforceable or voidable.

What a stupid law. These idiot lawyers will argue forever and keep on arguing as long as they are billing. She is a grown up. Steve was under duress too by getting married. She's an adult. In the situation duress = bullshit.

Post: #12

(12-05-2012 07:12 AM)tomtud Wrote:  

(12-04-2012 11:57 PM)Menace Wrote:  Signed three days before the wedding? Bad move. If the wife has a competent attorney he/she will argue it was signed under duress and thus unenforceable or voidable.

What a stupid law. These idiot lawyers will argue forever and keep on arguing as long as they are billing. She is a grown up. Steve was under duress too by getting married. She's an adult. In the situation duress = bullshit.

Having an out for duress is alright. In all levels of contract, if its signed under duress, its invalid. The issue is more what is considered duress.

Post: #13

When a man brings that kinda money into a relationship I really don't think "love" is even possible.I don't understand why rich guys wanna get married so bad.I would enjoy life to the fullest.Fuck getting tied down.

Post: #14

(12-05-2012 09:41 AM)TheMachinist Wrote:  When a man brings that kinda money into a relationship I really don't think "love" is even possible.I don't understand why rich guys wanna get married so bad.I would enjoy life to the fullest.Fuck getting tied down.

I would tell him about the forum, but the only N.B.A. coach who I know (and actually know pretty well) coaches a different team, so being able to communicate with Steve Nash would be extremely difficult.

Post: #15

Steve Nash is one of the coolest, smartest professional athletes around. He's a very thoughtful guy, and doesn't live in a bubble like many athletes or other famous people do. He's very politically and socially engaged. Before he married, he picked a different city each off-season to live in, just to experience different ways of life. He eventually spent a few off-seasons in NY. He played street ball down on West 4th Street. He joined a rec league soccer team, just like a regular guy. Actually, after he was married and had the twins, the whole family spent a lot of time in NY. It isn't uncommon for pre-nups to be signed just before the wedding, and yes, as long as an attorney is present to review and discuss the terms, it should stick. Some will attempt to interpret, "Either you sign or we don't get married" as duress, but it's simply a choice that another consenting adult has to make, and you shouldn't get back-end compensation by stating after the fact that you didn't like one of the available choices. Even in instances where the pre-nup was negotiated and signed well ahead of the wedding, women will still challenge the agreement with the hopes that he'll throw them something extra. Also, it depends on the state where the pre-nup/marriage took place. In some states the pre-nup isn't as iron-clad, while in others they hold pretty strictly.

Post: #16

I recall the Tony Parker/Eva Longoria divorce was prompted by Tony texting back-and-forth with the wife of a former teammate, Brent Barry.

Post: #17

Undoubtedly good news for Steve Nash at a time when he's dealing with a stress fracture and the Lakers are floundering horribly.

Post: #18

Spousal Support in general is a fucking retarded idea. If there's no kids in the picture, divide up the property according to who paid how much into it, and leave it at that.

Post: #19

I hung with Steve a few years back in NYC through a FOAF. The man is made for this forum. Well traveled, intelligent, articulate, mature. He'd be a player even if he wasn't a pro athlete.

Post: #20

Always really liked Steve Nash. And what's worse...10-15% and being free from her...or trying to just keep it going and get girls on the side. Hopefully he did a thorough cost-benefit analysis.

Post: #21

(12-05-2012 11:39 AM)Andy_B Wrote:  Spousal Support in general is a fucking retarded idea. If there's no kids in the picture, divide up the property according to who paid how much into it, and leave it at that.

Here's the issue with athletes and marriage. They'll almost always be on the hook in cases of divorce. For a lot of football players, I find that they marry the chick that was the girlfriend in college. They get drafted, and she follows him wherever he goes. They'll have a couple of kids, and take care of the house. They generally don't work. If he gets traded, they'll take care of setting up the new house, getting the kids in school, etc. He just worries about playing and paying for all of it. In other sports it's also rare that the women they marry have their own careers (occasionally, you'll have a player that's married to a lawyer or something). I've read some players' wives complain about how difficult it can be to get a traditional office career when the employer knows you're married to an athlete. They ask themselves, "What if her husband gets traded? Will she remain here, or will she quit and follow him? Am I investing in someone that might not be here in another year or two?" Legit concerns for an employer, depending on the nature of the position. Some women that are serious about career make it known early on that they aren't going to follow him around, so eventually they'll divorce because they really don't see each other. If there are children, he'll get hit for child support and a chunk of property. For chicks that don't have a career, they'll always say they "gave up" their career to take care of his kids and home, etc. They'll get alimony, child support, property, etc. There's no way around it for most athletes. Generally, women will wait until he retires, when the checks stop, then take whatever he has left after spending much of his money when he was earning. That's why athletes shouldn't marry or have kids until after retirement from playing, so they can protect much of what they've earned pre-marriage.

Post: #22

Thats too bad. The man really has his shit together and is respected both as an athlete as well as a person.

But I guess no matter who you are, you have no control over how the other person feels about you. Sad story, he could have had a great family.

Post: #23

He might be saving it all. He should have had a paternity test made for the three of the kids (just in case), then might find out a disturbing surprise. Enjoy it as long as you can in the USA; feminazis have managed to pass laws against it in UK, France, Germany, Scandinavia, etc on the grounds of paternity being given by rising a kid and not by genetics plus it could shake the grounds of almost half of the families lol looks like the old continent is full of bastards.

Post: #24

(12-05-2012 01:40 PM)Don Juan Tenorio Wrote:  He might be saving it all. He should have had a paternity test made for the three of the kids (just in case), then might find out a disturbing surprise. Enjoy it as long as you can in the USA; feminazis have managed to pass laws against it in UK, France, Germany, Scandinavia, etc on the grounds of paternity being given by rising a kid and not by genetics plus it could shake the grounds of almost half of the families lol looks like the old continent is full of bastards.

There are many guys who decide not to take paternity tests simply because it wouldn't be fair to the kids to find out that the guy who they thought was their father isn't. I hear what you're saying though. I think that the twin on the far right looks quite a bit like him.

Post: #25

We need more Alpha Steve Nash's and less Beta Kobe Bryant's.

Steve Nash will be leading that Locker room by fiat by playoff time.