Paulina Porizkova feels betrayed after being cut out of husband Ric Ocaseks will

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She seems like a nice lady but I fail to see why she expected any money if she was separated and was dating another man.

Also, if she and the other disinherited children all filed with lawyers the reality is that there won't end up being much for anyone. Usually the lawyers win in these cases.

So because the marriage ended, those 35 years mean nothing? Sounds like a successful marriage that ran it's course.

Um by definition a marriage that ends (legally or not) is no longer successful when it's over. Not to say it was terrible but when something is done, anything not just a marriage, it can't be a current success by definition.

[Anonymous]

I do wonder what these guys thimk when they marry women so much younger. I would think there would be a recognition that they can play around once he’s over a certain age. If you told a man he had to be celibate at 40 or 50, he’d act like you were out of your damn mind and of course he has the right to fool around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do wonder what these guys thimk when they marry women so much younger. I would think there would be a recognition that they can play around once he’s over a certain age. If you told a man he had to be celibate at 40 or 50, he’d act like you were out of your damn mind and of course he has the right to fool around.

They lasted for a good long while and they had two kids together. She was fine as long as he was the strong, confidant one who took care of her. As soon as he showed signs of aging and needing assistance from her, she did the old dump and run on him.

I think she was freaked out by the prospect of spending the rest of her life, or at least a good chunk of her life, caring for an old guy with a heart condition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do wonder what these guys thimk when they marry women so much younger. I would think there would be a recognition that they can play around once he’s over a certain age. If you told a man he had to be celibate at 40 or 50, he’d act like you were out of your damn mind and of course he has the right to fool around.

So true and I bet she couldn't envision herself becoming celibate at 50 either. It's not even about sex, but just not having romance after certain age is just sad.
He looked sort of youngish, but he was probably acting old or simply his age

[Anonymous]

"Ultimately, it will be up to a probate judge to decide if Porizkova really did “abandon” Ocasek. Just because his will said she did, it does not mean that the judge has to agree. Instead, it will be based on the testimony and evidence presented in court."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/trialandheirs/2019/11/13/an-estate-fight-may-be-coming-over-ric-ocaseks-estate/#2cca829e1b91

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I sorta think these women intentionally don’t move out of the shared houses as part of a inheritance or divorce strategy. Dennis Hopper’s wife did same.

I just read about Dennis Hopper’s wife’s lawsuit. Interesting that the share of the estate that was awarded to her reduced her daughter’s share versus it coming off the top and then the children receiving the % he allocated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who the heck expects to inherit money from their ex spouse or soon to be ex spouse. They were *divorcing* for goodness sake.

She doesn't get to hit the lotto just because he died before it all was finalized. He changed his will to leave his portion of the estate to 4 of his kids. I don't know why he disinherited 2 of his kids, I'm sure there is a story there, but I most certainly understand why he wrote Paulina out of his will.

It's crazy for her to talk about how betrayed she feels when she was the one who ran off and got herself a boyfriend because she didn't want to deal with an aging husband anymore. It is clear that their marriage was over.

Someone whose husband took all of the money she earned.

What does this mean? I saw the articles where she said she gave him all her modeling money, but for what? Does she just mean she got married and merged her money into a joint account? The phrase “gave him all her money” just strikes me as odd. Many couples merge their money post marriage but it’s not giving your spouse your money. She would have had access to the same funds over the last 30 years.

I have the same questions. I saw the video from the OP and Porizkova says she put her money into the marriage. What does that mean? My husband and I merged finances when we married, but we both have access to the joint accounts. If she gave him all her money and no longer had access to it then it seems she would have said that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who the heck expects to inherit money from their ex spouse or soon to be ex spouse. They were *divorcing* for goodness sake.

She doesn't get to hit the lotto just because he died before it all was finalized. He changed his will to leave his portion of the estate to 4 of his kids. I don't know why he disinherited 2 of his kids, I'm sure there is a story there, but I most certainly understand why he wrote Paulina out of his will.

It's crazy for her to talk about how betrayed she feels when she was the one who ran off and got herself a boyfriend because she didn't want to deal with an aging husband anymore. It is clear that their marriage was over.

It sounded to me like he was the one who asked for the divorce. She didn't want a divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She seems like a nice lady but I fail to see why she expected any money if she was separated and was dating another man.

Also, if she and the other disinherited children all filed with lawyers the reality is that there won't end up being much for anyone. Usually the lawyers win in these cases.

So because the marriage ended, those 35 years mean nothing? Sounds like a successful marriage that ran it's course.

Um by definition a marriage that ends (legally or not) is no longer successful when it's over. Not to say it was terrible but when something is done, anything not just a marriage, it can't be a current success by definition.

But they didn’t have any sort of divorce settlement did they? If he had lived and they had gone through with the divorce obviously she would have gotten something. It does not follow to me that because he died now she is entitled to absolutely nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She seems like a nice lady but I fail to see why she expected any money if she was separated and was dating another man.

Also, if she and the other disinherited children all filed with lawyers the reality is that there won't end up being much for anyone. Usually the lawyers win in these cases.

I think that she was under the impression that since Ric died before their divorce was finalized that she would get everything due to an odd stroke of luck of them still being married.

I think she's legitimately sad that Ric died but I also think that she's really been playing up the part of the grieving widow. And that just doesn't sit right with me. You don't get to leave your husband because he's "too old", find yourself a boyfriend, start divorce proceedings and then act like the grieving widow when your soon to be ex husband passes away unexpectedly. Shocked, saddened? Sure. But grief stricken like you've just lost the love of your life? No. You were ending your marriage to the guy lady.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw the CBS Morning Show yesterday. She seemed very sympathetic. There are a lot of mean/nasties on DCUM. They guy took her modeling money. He's the crook not her and he wrote some of his kids out of his will. That's a real dick move as well. She deserved better.

Agree

I was wondering about that. But he had been successful for years before they met, so I don't think he had to take her money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw the CBS Morning Show yesterday. She seemed very sympathetic. There are a lot of mean/nasties on DCUM. They guy took her modeling money. He's the crook not her and he wrote some of his kids out of his will. That's a real dick move as well. She deserved better.

Agree

Agree as well. Ric Ocasek was also estranged from his former friend and band co-founder, Benjamin Orr, before the latter's death. All of this estrangement doesn't paint a great picture of him. He is supposedly the one who wanted the divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sorta think these women intentionally don’t move out of the shared houses as part of a inheritance or divorce strategy. Dennis Hopper’s wife did same.

I just read about Dennis Hopper’s wife’s lawsuit. Interesting that the share of the estate that was awarded to her reduced her daughter’s share versus it coming off the top and then the children receiving the % he allocated.

That situation was a little different because the estranged wife was trying to get what she was entitled to under their prenuptial agreement (and her stepdaughter was fighting it). It seems Paulina should get some of their estate either from the pending divorce or from his will. She should not be shut out entirely because he happened to die before they completed divorce proceedings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sorta think these women intentionally don’t move out of the shared houses as part of a inheritance or divorce strategy. Dennis Hopper’s wife did same.

I just read about Dennis Hopper’s wife’s lawsuit. Interesting that the share of the estate that was awarded to her reduced her daughter’s share versus it coming off the top and then the children receiving the % he allocated.

That situation was a little different because the estranged wife was trying to get what she was entitled to under their prenuptial agreement (and her stepdaughter was fighting it). It seems Paulina should get some of their estate either from the pending divorce or from his will. She should not be shut out entirely because he happened to die before they completed divorce proceedings.

What does the pre-nup have to do with Dennis’ ex-wife’s share only reducing her daughter’s share? The amount owed to her should have been a debt to be paid by the estate. The remaining estate would be split based on his will. It’s odd that the ex-wife’s share was taken from one of the children’s share and not the entire estate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sorta think these women intentionally don’t move out of the shared houses as part of a inheritance or divorce strategy. Dennis Hopper’s wife did same.

I just read about Dennis Hopper’s wife’s lawsuit. Interesting that the share of the estate that was awarded to her reduced her daughter’s share versus it coming off the top and then the children receiving the % he allocated.

That situation was a little different because the estranged wife was trying to get what she was entitled to under their prenuptial agreement (and her stepdaughter was fighting it). It seems Paulina should get some of their estate either from the pending divorce or from his will. She should not be shut out entirely because he happened to die before they completed divorce proceedings.

What does the pre-nup have to do with Dennis’ ex-wife’s share only reducing her daughter’s share? The amount owed to her should have been a debt to be paid by the estate. The remaining estate would be split based on his will. It’s odd that the ex-wife’s share was taken from one of the children’s share and not the entire estate.

Seems to me she was only afforded a share based on having a blood relation to the ex-husband. Therefore if she wanted an additional part of the estate in contradiction to what the pre-nuptial agreement stated then it had to come from her daughter's portion who was 7 at the time. It could not be taken from the children of the 4 previous marriages and I think that's fair.

Each ex or separated wife gets a 'percentage' of the estate. If they want 80% of their portioned percentage to go to themselves and only 20% to their children, then that's their problem.