“Alienation of affection” plea denied
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia on Thursday denied a Mississippi business man’s plea to postpone a ruling that he must pay $112,000 in punitive damages as part of an award for “alienation of affection” toward another man’s wife. No opinion was issued as the Justice rejected the stay application filed by Jerry Fitch, Sr., of Holly Springs, Miss. (Fitch v. Valentine, application 07A324).
The request and the case were discussed in this post.
I happen to be a woman, so I am going to write from a female perspective, but the masculine/feminine pronouns can easily be reversed.
This woman was married, had an affair with her millionaire, married boss, destroyed two familes. This woman had no respect for the contract of marriage she had with her husband, made a laughing stock out of him, hurt him, humiliated him.
She had no respect for the wife and family of the boss, for the contract of marriage the boss’ wife had with the man. She hurt and humiliated this woman. She destroyed the home and family this woman spent her life building.
The millionaire boss, likewise, had no respect for the contract of marriage he had entered into with his wife. He had no respect for the marriage and feelings of the Plumber.
Two, low-life, immoral scumballs–they actually deserve each other.
If a third party enters your home and steals something, say an inconsequential knickknack that may hold sentimental value, the home owner can seek redress through the law.
The person can be arrested, charged with a crime. The owner may get his stolen item back, or the thief will be ordered to make restitution.
At the very least, she will get some chance at justice.
But, a person can destroy the home you have spent your life building by having the morals of an alleycat, wreck your faith in your chosen spouse, cause you all sorts of heartbreak, hurt your children (if you have them) by destroying their home, security, and family, and they should not have to pay?
This millionaire needs to shut up and pay the plumber. He (and this woman) caused him PAIN, distress, stress, cost him $$$ in hiring lawyers for the divorce.
Come on. I just saw this woman and her millionaire boss/husband on the Today show. Does anyone here really believe she LOVES this old man? He just sat there, like a lump. She just wanted a man with money–she is no better than a hooker. She had sex, got pregnant, to get rich–make money, and to steal a HUGE share of the inheritance from the children by his first marriage.
If more states brought back the Alienation of Affection laws, allowing wronged spouses to seek financial redress against third parties who wreck their families and home, cause them all sorts of emotional and psychological harm, then we would have fewer cases like the Dan & Betty Broderick case, or that woman in Texas who ran her husband over as he left a hotel with his receptionist.
Having your home ruined, having absolutely no chance of justice legally, facing the prospect of losing your home, your health insurance, your standard of living, feeling powerless, etc is HORRIBLE! The pain, the distress of the wronged spouse is very real.
Wronged spouses DESERVE some legal recourse, some satisfaction when this happens. The Fitches need to pay the Plumber and be glad his pain and injured sensibilities found satisfaction with a lawsuit instead of at the business end of a shotgun.
Comment by Dee Sardems — October 29, 2007 @ 9:53 am
While I have experienced that the only people that benefit from a legal divorce are all of the attorneys, legal staff members and judges. Both parties usually suffer(except in the cases where the judge &/or jury are NOT impartial – something you see frequently in South Texas); and if children are involved they suffer most of all, no matter how the parents seperate. Having the opportunity to have some legal recourse via an “Alienation of affection” plea would certainly help in the healing process of someone who’s life has recently been shattered by their life-partner committing adultery. It would also cut down on the legal problems that occur during or after a divorce based on adultery, by offering the harmed person(s) a civil manner to vent their horrific pain. However, it would reduce legal fees for lawyers and the legal system; because there would be less threatening contact, need for restraining orders and enforcement of them, actual physical violence, murder and suicide by distraught spouses, need for therapy, money for pharmaceuticals, space in medical facilities, and less income and need for space in our penal system. All states should have an “Alienation of affection” plea option in the best interest of the peopl of each state.
Comment by Nina Johnson — October 29, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
While I have experienced that the only people that benefit from a legal divorce are all of the attorneys, legal staff members and judges. Both parties usually suffer(except in the cases where the judge &/or jury are NOT impartial – something you see frequently in South Texas); and if children are involved they suffer most of all, no matter how the parents seperate. Having the opportunity to have some legal recourse via an “Alienation of affection” plea would certainly help in the healing process of someone who’s life has recently been shattered by their life-partner committing adultery. It would also cut down on the legal problems that occur during or after a divorce based on adultery, by offering the harmed person(s) a civil manner to vent their horrific pain. However, it would reduce legal fees for lawyers and the legal system; because there would be less threatening contact, need for restraining orders and enforcement of them, actual physical violence, murder and suicide by distraught spouses, need for therapy, money for pharmaceuticals, space in medical facilities, and less income and need for space in our penal system. All states should have an “Alienation of affection” plea option in the best interest of the people of each state.
Comment by Nina Johnson — October 29, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
I am experienceing the same thing, my husband of 17 years had an affair 4-5 years ago and sired twins that are 3 years old by his mistress. He started treating me like a dog 2 years ago and stopped paying our mortgage last year thereby letting our house go into foreclosure. Fought for visitation of our son and took our 7 year old son to meet this women and her 4 kids(2 previous children and twins by my husband). My son came home to say he has brothers. While I am standing outside being evicted from my home with not money, I asked him if these 2 three year old kids were his’ and his response was “yes, big mistake”. He saved the money from not paying the mortgage on our house and put downpayment on another house for his mistress and her kids.
I am trying to get justice. What happened to the santiny of marriage?
Comment by cynthia cummings — October 29, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
Sanctity only exists in marriage when two people love each other. Not only would ‘alienation of affection’ laws not help marriage, they would degrade and dishonor what marriage is supposed to be -real love between two people. Love can not be legislated. No one can be forced to love another; no one can force oneself to love another even if he desires to love another. Love is not a contract; people are not property. Most kids in junior high already know that no one can possibly steal a person’s love or affection away from another_love is so much greater and more powerful and sacred than that. Something truly sacred can not be stolen -love is beyond that.
It hasn’t been very long since women had few rights and slavery existed. I know losing what one loves and values is scary, but no one can be forced to love another. The commitment is only as real as the heart that is in it. Love is its own law, greater than all other laws. ‘Alienation of affection’ laws are a dangerous thing; not too long ago many people were considered property. To truly love one must be free. If a person can not ensure that his own spouse loves him, can not be sure of having such power that he can make his spouse feel affection and
love for him, how can anybody else? No one has the power to make another person feel love or affection or not feel love and affection. In fact, mostly people have very little power to make anyone else feel, do, or think anything at all. The business and financial side of marriage that is examined in divorce proceedings can be handled like all other divorce proceedings. If, for instance, a spouse wants to leave a marriage because he just wants to be single or travel the world by himself, there is no penalty for him leaving. There is nothing to say that something exterior to him made him do that. There are adequate mechanisms set up already to handle the business side of divorce without having to treat love and people as property and commodities. ‘Alienation of affection’ laws would only discourage people from marrying. As to morality, real love subsumes all morality -morality is constructed and theorized about in reference to real love. One of the commentators above stated that restitution from ‘alienation of affection’ laws was a better solution than physical violence or murder; such a comment highlights how ‘alienation of affection’ laws are themselves a real kind of violence.
Comment by Amy Martin — October 29, 2007 @ 10:56 pm
“Sanctity only exists in marriage when two people love each other.” – Amy Martin said this …. and this is how affairs begin. “I love you but I am not in love with you”.
The sanctity of marriage means saying an oath – making a promise – to stay faithful even when feelings are scarce and times are tough.
Because feelings fluxuate in a marriage – one cannot run away from the oath – the promise – on the temporary fact that some feelings have changed.
What does that teach our children? That they only need honor their word when they feel like it?
Sanctity of marriage is an agreement with God – not something to be determined by capricious unpredictable feelings. How juvinile!
Comment by valerie saenz — October 30, 2007 @ 1:08 pm
juvenile – reflecting psychological or intellectual immaturity
Comment by valerie saenz — October 30, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
Love may not be able to be legislated but marriage IS a legal, binding contract. Love “feelings” wax and wan over the years but commitment is what keeps the marriage together during the rough times. If everyone cheated or divorced as soon as their “feelings” waned, there would be no purpose for marriage. There are many people out there that believe in the sanctity of marriage, who believe in the commitment they made in front of God and who stick out the tough times knowing there will be better days ahead.
I fully support bringing back fault divorce and alienation of affection laws. Maybe then those interlopers who deliberately set out to destroy another person’s marriage will think twice before interfering in someone else’s business.
Comment by Faith Compton — October 30, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
I think it’s fully justifiable to sue for alienation of affection, people should be punished for wrecking other peoples’ marriages. Go for it. As a woman and from what I have observed of infidelity, I would say that the male who goes after a married woman is not so much interested in possessing her as he is in trying to violate the status of the husband. And the same can be said of the female interloper who goes after the married guy. Whether it’s a man or woman who is the interloper, you will typically find that this kind of person can’t get on with people of their own gender. It’s a power struggle of the lowest kind.
Comment by Desiree Harper — March 16, 2008 @ 3:27 pm