Comments Invited!

To post a comment on any article, just click on the article's title, scroll down to the bottom of the page, and begin typing in the space provided. You may also register for a comments account, which will make commenting even easier. We look forward to reading your opinions!

About Us

Misandry Review is a forum for talented bloggers who write from a pro-male perspective. Our content spans a variety of viewpoints, including MRA, MGTOW, conservative and libertarian (more info). To request inclusion into the system, please contact John Dias.

Search

Books We Recommend

Recent Posts


« | Main | »

Sportscaster Nantz to pay ex-wife $916K a year

By Men's Activism News | Source | November 3, 2009

Story here. Excerpt:

'HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) - CBS sportscaster Jim Nantz must pay $916,000 yearly in alimony and child support to his ex-wife and give up their Connecticut home under terms of a newly issued divorce decree.

The ruling, made Monday in Bridgeport Superior Court, dissolves the 26-year marriage of Nantz and Ann-Lorraine "Lorrie" Carlsen Nantz. It comes after both testified about the breakdown of their marriage; Judge Howard Owens concluded neither was at fault.
...
Owens noted that the couple didn't share the same interests in Nantz's television career, which required frequent travel as the network's primary commentator for college football, golf and basketball, as well as appearances at charity events.

"In fairness, for most of the years he prioritized his family obligation and put his wife and daughter Caroline first. As frequently happens in marriages of lengthy duration, the parties do not have the same interest and ardor for their spouses' endeavors," the judge wrote in his decision.

Under the ruling, Nantz must pay $72,000 in alimony monthly until he dies or his ex-wife remarries, and another $1,000 weekly in child support for the next two years.

Nantz's attorney, Gaetano Ferro of New Canaan, said Tuesday that the famed sportscaster only wants what's best for his daughter and will not fight the terms of the divorce decree.'

Topics: Men's Activism News | Comments

  • "Judge Howard Owens concluded neither was at fault."
    Thank god for that - imagine how much the poor bastard would have to pay if he had been at fault!
blog comments powered by Disqus