Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Could you explain the reasoning behind this:
Kaine Horman has filed a motion in court this morning, asking a judge to order his estranged wife, Terri Moulton Horman, to disclose the source of the reportedly $350,000 she has paid to retain criminal defense attorney Stephen Houze.
"If Respondent has provided funds to her attorneys for her legal representation and considers them to be marital liability, these funds are marital property and Respondent should be required to pay one-half of these funds to Peitioner to use for his attorney fees and costs," wrote Laura Rackner, Kaine's attorney.
I may be misunderstanding the point here (probably am, LOL).
But what business is it of Kaine's --- particularly in his civil action --- how his estranged wife pays for her criminal attorney? I've seen divorce proceedings where the petitioner asks the respondent to pay legal fees, but this is different. Why would she bring up an attorney not representing Terri in the divorce case?
This sentence has me confused: "If Respondent has provided funds to her attorneys for her legal representation and considers them to be marital liability"
What does that mean ?
This is probably legal (I'm sure it is) but it doesn't feel right to me. IMO this blurs the line between the civil and potential criminal proceedings. Kaine seems to be fishing for information that can be used in the criminal investigation --- looking for a possible accomplice, evidence that Terri had a 'job' on the side, whatever. Is it likely the judge will view it as crossing the line into the criminal proceeding?
I guess the gist of my question here is ... can a judge in a civil action force a person to disclose information that could possibly be used to incriminate them in a criminal proceeding? To my untrained eye, it appears this could be the case here; if so, in your opinion, how should Houze handle this? Can he argue a 5th Amendment privilege, even though this is a civil case?
I am soooo confused lol
Holy carp! $350,000 is alotta money! I thought it was "only" $250,000.
I'm waiting with baited breath to find out where the money came from. *My* paltry little sum of bettin' money is on an entertainment industry deal.
But he does need to know if the expenditure sets him up for any kind of financial obligation.
A defense attorney who requires this much moolah in advance must not have much faith in his client's story. He is in it for the long run and expects to spend a lot of time and money defending her. Doesn't look good for Terri.
eh, More nasty details. Really some of this stuff needs to stay between them.
I'm kind of wondering that myself. Is that part of information that has to be disclosed between attorneys? I'm sure someone's monitoring her bank accounts. Maybe there was a huge deposit and then a huge withdrawal and they figured out where it went. Who knows.
But still, 350,000. Egad that is a large amount of money for her to get her hands on at this point, unless she's an heir to a fortune we don't know about.
That's a little steep for a month's worth of lawyering, no?
If her family gave her the money, it's really none of his business.
Kaine wants half of it? Then Terri should ask Kaine to cash out his retirement fund/assets to pay half of her attorney fees. MOO
I'm kind of wondering that myself. Is that part of information that has to be disclosed between attorneys? I'm sure someone's monitoring her bank accounts. Maybe there was a huge deposit and then a huge withdrawal and they figured out where it went. Who knows.
But still, 350,000. Egad that is a large amount of money for her to get her hands on at this point, unless she's an heir to a fortune we don't know about.
Could it be a stunt to get Terri to come to court? Now put pressure on the attorney?
Kaine thinks this money is his? Talk about dishonesty--he would know if she had this money. I'm sure he has his suspicions on where the money came from (her parents/family?). This is nothing more than harassment, IMO.
I'm kind of wondering that myself. Is that part of information that has to be disclosed between attorneys? I'm sure someone's monitoring her bank accounts. Maybe there was a huge deposit and then a huge withdrawal and they figured out where it went. Who knows.
But still, 350,000. Egad that is a large amount of money for her to get her hands on at this point, unless she's an heir to a fortune we don't know about.
I'm kind of wondering that myself. Is that part of information that has to be disclosed between attorneys? I'm sure someone's monitoring her bank accounts. Maybe there was a huge deposit and then a huge withdrawal and they figured out where it went. Who knows.
But still, 350,000. Egad that is a large amount of money for her to get her hands on at this point, unless she's an heir to a fortune we don't know about.