• S E X
    L O V E +
    R E L A T I O N S H I P S


    ❤️ Welcome Guest! ❤️


    Posting Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • SLR Moderators: Senior Staff

Alienation of affection

I get what ur saying on the value aspect CH.

I think the people in support view it as other civil lawsuits, in that the 3rd party is impeding on a contractual obligation. A contract where two parties are legally bound (aka marriage).
 
*samsonite* said:
I get what ur saying on the value aspect CH.

I think the people in support view it as other civil lawsuits, in that the 3rd party is impeding on a contractual obligation. A contract where two parties are legally bound (aka marriage).
Click to expand...

Unless the 3rd party is a part of the contractual agreement, I don't see how they can be sued.

You could still sue them for damages, it wouldn't take too much to make it look like they inflicted emotional based pain and suffering on you.

It also brings up an important point: what if you start having sex with someone, who neglects to tell you that they aren't single but are actually married to someone else? You would have to prove the person had knowledge they were sleeping with someone who was married.
 
*samsonite* said:
You can sue the "other woman/man". I stated that in my original post. It's a tort action where the spouse can file against a third party for "Alienation of Affection". It's quite real and spouses have been successful in these suits. It is still valid in New Mexico, Mississippi, Utah, etc...
Click to expand...

I know you said that, but I really don't see how it could be valid. There are so many "ifs". I can't see how it would ever make it through. For the "other woman/man" at least. Would love to see an example of this though. I'm curious about how it would work.
 
Correct, that's part of the action. You have to be able to prove they knew the spouse was married and still continued having a relationship with them. I was thinking maybe by the wife emailing the mistress saying "Ur f*cking my husband. Back off b*tch!" and if she responds saying "Nope." And the husband and homewrecker run off together, leaving you with physical evidence that she knew he was married and pursued him any way. That's how I envision it anyway ;)

You can also sue family members or therapists under the same action. If you can prove a therapist convinced your husband to divorce you, you can sue the therapist under this lawsuit. I can almost understand this one a little more bc some therapists can mind fuck you!
 
What you tell your therapist is confidential. But you are allowed to speak to others about your sessions. HIPAA only protects the patient.

I'm sure the proof would come from your spouse's admission that the therapist convinced them to divorce.
 
llama112 said:
I know you said that, but I really don't see how it could be valid. There are so many "ifs". I can't see how it would ever make it through. For the "other woman/man" at least. Would love to see an example of this though. I'm curious about how it would work.
Click to expand...

The biggest case I know of took place in North Carolina. A woman successfully sued her husband's mistress for $9 million under "Alienation of Affection". If you search it, you can get the details. That is A LOT of money!
 
You could technically argue this for a lot of things if that's how you perceive human rights. Human rights are about equality and freedom but do not protect you in doing whatever you want with your body. Even if it is a "victimless crime"(prostitution,drug use, etc..) you can still be prosecuted.
Click to expand...

Though I can't presume to speak for rangrz, I don't think that this is really to his point. In your opinion, for instance, why should prostitutes be criminally prosecuted? Drug users? You're right, rangrz and I very well could (and do) 'argue this for a lot of things.'

And it isn't "the state" that is pursuing you. The state is not the Petitioner in this action. It is a civil lawsuit.
Click to expand...

How does this fact alter the patent absurdity of the law? Either way you slice it, it is the state apparatus that allows for such 'civil lawsuits' to be processed and heard in the first place. To write the state off as a disinterested third party is disingenuous here.
 
*samsonite* said:
It's a good day- seeing as it is an individual state law and not federal, and my state isn't included in the participating states, I don't pay a a single dime toward it. Taxes are an entirely different issue. There are lots of things I don't like having to contribute toward but this is the US. Majority rules.



You could technically argue this for a lot of things if that's how you perceive human rights. Human rights are about equality and freedom but do not protect you in doing whatever you want with your body. Even if it is a "victimless crime"(prostitution,drug use, etc..) you can still be prosecuted. And it isn't "the state" that is pursuing you. The state is not the Petitioner in this action. It is a civil lawsuit. There is much debate about this bc some people believe you should only be able to prosecute for theft of tangible items (money,cars..) but when you have children and the father/husband is being stolen some believe that should be less enforceable. In regards to the lawsuit itself, you have to prove the third party knew the spouse was married, therefore intentionally meddled in a union (essentially a contract) between to parties. I suppose your belief in this lawsuit comes down to your perception of marriage and adultery.
Click to expand...

The 3rd person was never a party to the contract however, and I don't see how they can be held liable for failing to comply with a contract which they never entered.
Further, I see an issue in proving that not only did the 3rd party know the person was married, but that they also knew that the marriage was not open/into swinging/otherwise consented to extra-marital sex within it, as such things do exist. I.E. if they claim the party in the marriage told them such was the case, how can they be held liable for it?

There is still an issue with what exactly can be agreed to in a contract, I can not enter a contract which forfeits my human rights. I can not enter a contract that i.e. surrenders my informed consent and withdraw thereof for a medical procedure, or which surrenders my right to withdraw my consent to sexual activity(Not stopping sex with someone who initially consented..including if you paid a prostitute, which is a contract in essence as it is an exchange of consideration is still aggravated sexual assault here) such contracts are of no effect and un-enforceable, and I see this issue as similar in nature. U.S. Law is weird sometimes.

Finally, yeah, the issue of value. I don't recall sexual consent or activity(or lack of) having a monetary value and indeed such acts are illegal (prostitution is assigning monetary value to sexual consent and activity and is a criminal offense in most places including the Jurisdictions you mentioned) and since it has no value as such, how can one seek compensation for it?
 
The 3rd person was never a party to the contract however, and I don't see how they can be held liable for failing to comply with a contract which they never entered.
Click to expand...

Depending upon how you view the issue, this may resemble a kind of tort-mediated recovery of damages incurred by a third party impinging upon the terms of the contract. That is, if a third person knowingly induces an involved party to violate the terms of the contract, the other party (the cheated-on spouse) can seek remuneration for suffering, damages, etc.
 
Samsonite, I saw an interview with the woman who won a while ago. The difference here is that (if I remember correctly), she would have gotten a huge payoff anyway. He was cheating, and they were married for years (30??). She was also just a housewife. It really was your typical "husband got money and found a younger, hotter chick and left the poor wife with the kids" scenario.

She basically got her alimony upfront.
 
@P.A. You posted while I posted lol.

Though I can't presume to speak for rangrz, I don't think that this is really to his point. In your opinion, for instance, why should prostitutes be criminally prosecuted? Drug users? You're right, rangrz and I very well could (and do) 'argue this for a lot of things.'
Click to expand...

That is essentially where I was going with it too. Not to mention, when it comes to something as profoundly personal and visceral as ones own body and their sexual functions, should anything which is not already a criminal offense be addressable in terms of a civil action? We are not talking about SCO vs IBM over a few lines of code or something here, we are talking about a human being and their body. It's a bit different.

How does this fact alter the patent absurdity of the law? Either way you slice it, it is the state apparatus that allows for such 'civil lawsuits' to be processed and heard in the first place. To write the state off as a disinterested third party is disingenuous here.
Click to expand...

Indeed, The State is providing it's authority and power to try and enforce these claims, it is participating. To take it to it's conclusion, it is not different then if The State was willing to enforce a "contract" for slavery, in that case, we would still consider The State to be complacent in a human rights violation and to endorse slavery.

Depending upon how you view the issue, this may resemble a kind of tort-mediated recovery of damages incurred by a third party impinging upon the terms of the contract. That is, if a third person knowingly induces an involved party to violate the terms of the contract, the other party (the cheated-on spouse) can seek remuneration for suffering, damages, etc.
Click to expand...

I see where your going with that and I understand, but how far should this taken? If I am contractually obligated to show up at work, and my GF decided to jump me and fuck my brains out and as such I missed work, would it really be reasonable to have my employer hold her liable for my lost productivity?
 
P A said:
Though I can't presume to speak for rangrz, I don't think that this is really to his point. In your opinion, for instance, why should prostitutes be criminally prosecuted? Drug users? You're right, rangrz and I very well could (and do) 'argue this for a lot of things.'
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure what you're point is here. My comment was in regards to them stating that this action is impeding on human rights. Which it is not, hence my description. Their argument of being able to do what you want with your body and not being prosecuted for consensual sex is not how statutes work. You CAN and will be prosecuted for things you do with your body. The details I put were examples, not debate.


P A said:
How does this fact alter the patent absurdity of the law? Either way you slice it, it is the state apparatus that allows for such 'civil lawsuits' to be processed and heard in the first place. To write the state off as a disinterested third party is disingenuous here.
Click to expand...
Again, don't understand where you are going here. You arguing apples to oranges when you quote a fact I wrote and argue it with a personal opinion. You should probably just argue directly with people's opinions rather than arguing for someone else. Its a lot easier to follow that way, given that you can take what either of us were saying out of context, and did.

With regard to what YOU said, if the state was an interested party to the case then they would be prosecuting or providing counsel. Allowing people the opportunity to present their grievances in court is entirely different than being a party to it or having an interest in it.
 
Lysis said:
Samsonite, I saw an interview with the woman who won a while ago. The difference here is that (if I remember correctly), she would have gotten a huge payoff anyway. He was cheating, and they were married for years (30??). She was also just a housewife. It really was your typical "husband got money and found a younger, hotter chick and left the poor wife with the kids" scenario.

She basically got her alimony upfront.
Click to expand...
The grounds for obtaining alimony and the grounds for winning a tort action such as this are very different from each other. The lawsuit was brought up against the mistress. Even if he had married the mistress her financial status is in-admissible in court and would be irrelevant in a dissolution hearing. New girlfriends, mistresses, and even hot new wives are not even permitted to speak in a dissolution hearing and have no bearing on the case, financially or otherwise. You can't sue a mistress and win based on the the fact that a different party (the husband) owes you money for alimony. The Judge would never combine the debt bc it is against 2 separate defendents. The alimony and A.A. action would have to be tried separately in different divisions of court (family/civil). The mistress had to pay based on evidence against her not the husband.

You are right however in the fact that she was entitled to alimony but that was a separate issue. The length of marriage, career status (unemployed in her case), and financial dependence are all variables that will determine alimony. She was entitled to that as well bc of her lack of current job skills and financial dependence.
 
Rangrz- Inresponse to this: "I.E. if they claim the party in the marriage told them such was the case, how can they be held liable for it?" That very well could be the case. And there lies the challenge for the petitioner. To win the case you would have to have hard evidence. I'm sure if it were easy to prove we would hear about it more.

As far as this goes, "I don't recall sexual consent or activity(or lack of) having a monetary value and indeed such acts are illegal (prostitution is assigning monetary value to sexual consent and activity and is a criminal offense in most places including the Jurisdictions you mentioned) and since it has no value as such, how can one seek compensation for it?"
-If you are referring to what I wrote about prostitution, that was about your statement regarding violations of human rights when the state is involved in what you do with your body. If this was a coincidental reference, you are forgetting that you can sue for things that don't have monetary value. Sentiment is also relevant in civil cases. I can absolutely seek compensation for things with no monetary value. Sentimental value and emotional distress are valid in civil cases.
 
Shouldn`t you be more pissed at the other person that cheated? Not the "home wrecker"? THEY are the one that really betrayed their partner. The person they cheated WITH isn`t important. What IS important is your partner violated your trust, your vows, and your feelings.
My 2 pennies.
 
Shouldn`t you be more pissed at the other person that cheated? Not the "home wrecker"?
Click to expand...

Yes. It's like I told a married guy a few weeks ago: It's like they read from a book. They always say the marriage is over and they are moving out and they are leaving the wife. Sure, it's stupid to believe that, but it's also an engagement on a false premise that the perpetrator is telling the mistress.

I would hate her, no doubt, but my anger would be towards him. I'd rip her face off if she came near me, but I'd be more interested in kicking his ass out and suing HIM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top