Prenups Dont Eem matter anymore, b... why get married if you got money?

8,894
1,395
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
http://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/wif...e-to-overturn-prenup-agreement-182017682.html



Wife of Millionaire Wins "Unprecedented" Case to Overturn Prenup Agreement
By Beth Greenfield, Shine Staff


PostsBy Beth Greenfield, Shine Staff | Love + Sex – 23 hours agoEmail0Share1944Print
"I wanted people to see how I felt," Cioffi-Petrakis said of the video she made (see bottom of post for full video). …A Long Island mother of three has become a postnuptial hero, after a prenup nearly cost her everything. In a landmark case, Elizabeth Cioffi-Petrakis, 39, won an appeal overturning a bizarre premarital agreement with her millionaire husband. Now she says she may be entitled to half of her ex’s worth when their divorce becomes final.

The win, say matrimonial law experts, is huge.

More on Shine: What I Wish I Knew Before I Got Divorced

“This is unprecedented in the family law world,” celebrity divorce lawyer Vikki Ziegler told Yahoo! Shine. “This is a landmark decision that will likely be litigated a great deal in the future in similar cases for those who feel their prenups are unconscionable.”

So how did it happen?

“I won it because I pretty much did it myself,” Cioffi-Petrakis told Yahoo! Shine. “I had three prior attorneys who messed up my case big-time. And I was pretty much dead in the water until I got educated.”

More on Yahoo!: Why You Should Say "I Do" to a Prenup

To win the case, Cioffi-Petrakis had to prove in a Long Island court that her husband, commercial property developer Peter Petrakis, coerced her into signing the prenup. She claims he dropped the premarital bomb four days before their wedding day in 1998, leaving her with little time for a contractual dispute. She also told the court the agreement included promises her ex never intended to keep. Among those promises, she said, was that he would add her name to the deed of their Old Brookville home, and that he would destroy the prenup after the birth of their first child.


Peter Petrakis. Photo: ADRIEL REBOH/ PatrickMcMullan.com“He claimed he was just protecting his business, and that his lawyers made him have a prenup,” Cioffi-Petrakis said. “And me, a naïve young girl, I believed it.” She added that she’d been with Petrakis since she was 18 years old—six years before they were married—and that she was so committed that she’d converted from Catholicism to his religion of Greek Orthodox.

“I loved him, I trusted him and I believed in his word,” she explained.

But when he did not put the house in her name, and when she first gave birth 12 years ago to twin boys (and then later to a daughter, now 8), the two began what would be come a years-long journey in and out of lawyers’ offices to contest the prenuptial agreement.

Then finally, in January, a judge ruled in Cioffi-Petrakis’s favor, finding that she had successfully proven what is called “fraud by the inducement” in a contract. To do that, Cioffi-Petrakis explained, she presented the court with “patterns of behavior” to show that Petrakis “was not honest when he made the promises.”

Ziegler, author of “The Pre-Marital Planner,” further explained the court’s decision to Shine. “Many couples discuss the terms of their prenups and say they will do or say things in the future that are not memorialized in writing,” she said. “However, this fraudulent inducement to buy a house, put the marital home in joint name and make other financial incentives after the parties wed appeared to sway the appellate panel who agreed to set aside the prenuptial agreement based on fraud.”

Petrakis did not return a message left for him by Shine at one of his businesses, the One Stop Smoke Shop in Seaford, Long Island. His lavish Old Brookville home was featured in a 2010 New York Times story, “Over-the-Top Houses,” described as a “newly renovated shingle and stone farm ranch on 2.29 acres,” and equipped with a “lower-level nightclub” featuring a 24-foot onyx bar, 1,200-bottle wine cellar and a DJ booth. His chain of smoke shops, according to the New York Post, is worth “at least $5 million.”

Cioffi-Petrakis told Shine that she (with much help from her parents) shelled out nearly $475,000 in lawyers’ fees over the years, and that her husband has paid more than $600,000. “And we haven’t even gotten to the divorce,” she said. Despite the fact that the couple have been estranged since 2010 when Petrakis first filed for divorce, the proceedings were put on hold by the court until the the prenup matter could be settled. Now the two will be able to move ahead to make their split official.

The pressure of the case pushed her to extremes. “I almost took my own life because of the depression and stresses,” she said. “I wound up in the hospital with a nervous breakdown.”

A positive outcome of the ordeal, though, has been Cioffi-Petrakis starting her own business, Divorce Prep Experts, a divorce-court advisement service, which has been slowly getting off the ground since 2008.

“I’m not a lawyer, but I think I have advocated for myself better than any lawyer has,” she said. “My mission is to empower and protect anyone in this position. I know what to look out for, and I bring reputable professionals together to help.” Her company, she said, offers her clients invaluable advice and knowledge from judges, mediators, divorce coaches and child psychologists, in the hopes of saving time and money through the divorce process.

“Divorce Prep Experts can save lives,” she said.




:x :x

WHY EEM GET MARRIED WHEN YOU GOT PAPER?
 
Last edited:
If she was so worried about not being able to dispute the prenup, then why did she sign it and married him 4 days later.

His lawyer should have argued this point.
 
Last edited:
Son I have worked way too hard to get where I am today. I dare someone to try to take away what they never helped me to get.


That's why I will only marry a woman who is as wealthy or wealthier than I am, I'm not about that life. :smh:
 
http://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/wif...e-to-overturn-prenup-agreement-182017682.html



Wife of Millionaire Wins "Unprecedented" Case to Overturn Prenup Agreement
By Beth Greenfield, Shine Staff


PostsBy Beth Greenfield, Shine Staff | Love + Sex – 23 hours agoEmail0Share1944Print
"I wanted people to see how I felt," Cioffi-Petrakis said of the video she made (see bottom of post for full video). …A Long Island mother of three has become a postnuptial hero, after a prenup nearly cost her everything. In a landmark case, Elizabeth Cioffi-Petrakis, 39, won an appeal overturning a bizarre premarital agreement with her millionaire husband. Now she says she may be entitled to half of her ex’s worth when their divorce becomes final.

The win, say matrimonial law experts, is huge.

More on Shine: What I Wish I Knew Before I Got Divorced

“This is unprecedented in the family law world,” celebrity divorce lawyer Vikki Ziegler told Yahoo! Shine. “This is a landmark decision that will likely be litigated a great deal in the future in similar cases for those who feel their prenups are unconscionable.”

So how did it happen?

“I won it because I pretty much did it myself,” Cioffi-Petrakis told Yahoo! Shine. “I had three prior attorneys who messed up my case big-time. And I was pretty much dead in the water until I got educated.”

More on Yahoo!: Why You Should Say "I Do" to a Prenup

To win the case, Cioffi-Petrakis had to prove in a Long Island court that her husband, commercial property developer Peter Petrakis, coerced her into signing the prenup. She claims he dropped the premarital bomb four days before their wedding day in 1998, leaving her with little time for a contractual dispute. She also told the court the agreement included promises her ex never intended to keep. Among those promises, she said, was that he would add her name to the deed of their Old Brookville home, and that he would destroy the prenup after the birth of their first child.


Peter Petrakis. Photo: ADRIEL REBOH/ PatrickMcMullan.com“He claimed he was just protecting his business, and that his lawyers made him have a prenup,” Cioffi-Petrakis said. “And me, a naïve young girl, I believed it.” She added that she’d been with Petrakis since she was 18 years old—six years before they were married—and that she was so committed that she’d converted from Catholicism to his religion of Greek Orthodox.

“I loved him, I trusted him and I believed in his word,” she explained.

But when he did not put the house in her name, and when she first gave birth 12 years ago to twin boys (and then later to a daughter, now 8), the two began what would be come a years-long journey in and out of lawyers’ offices to contest the prenuptial agreement.

Then finally, in January, a judge ruled in Cioffi-Petrakis’s favor, finding that she had successfully proven what is called “fraud by the inducement” in a contract. To do that, Cioffi-Petrakis explained, she presented the court with “patterns of behavior” to show that Petrakis “was not honest when he made the promises.”

Ziegler, author of “The Pre-Marital Planner,” further explained the court’s decision to Shine. “Many couples discuss the terms of their prenups and say they will do or say things in the future that are not memorialized in writing,” she said. “However, this fraudulent inducement to buy a house, put the marital home in joint name and make other financial incentives after the parties wed appeared to sway the appellate panel who agreed to set aside the prenuptial agreement based on fraud.”

Petrakis did not return a message left for him by Shine at one of his businesses, the One Stop Smoke Shop in Seaford, Long Island. His lavish Old Brookville home was featured in a 2010 New York Times story, “Over-the-Top Houses,” described as a “newly renovated shingle and stone farm ranch on 2.29 acres,” and equipped with a “lower-level nightclub” featuring a 24-foot onyx bar, 1,200-bottle wine cellar and a DJ booth. His chain of smoke shops, according to the New York Post, is worth “at least $5 million.”

Cioffi-Petrakis told Shine that she (with much help from her parents) shelled out nearly $475,000 in lawyers’ fees over the years, and that her husband has paid more than $600,000. “And we haven’t even gotten to the divorce,” she said. Despite the fact that the couple have been estranged since 2010 when Petrakis first filed for divorce, the proceedings were put on hold by the court until the the prenup matter could be settled. Now the two will be able to move ahead to make their split official.

The pressure of the case pushed her to extremes. “I almost took my own life because of the depression and stresses,” she said. “I wound up in the hospital with a nervous breakdown.”

A positive outcome of the ordeal, though, has been Cioffi-Petrakis starting her own business, Divorce Prep Experts, a divorce-court advisement service, which has been slowly getting off the ground since 2008.

“I’m not a lawyer, but I think I have advocated for myself better than any lawyer has,” she said. “My mission is to empower and protect anyone in this position. I know what to look out for, and I bring reputable professionals together to help.” Her company, she said, offers her clients invaluable advice and knowledge from judges, mediators, divorce coaches and child psychologists, in the hopes of saving time and money through the divorce process.

“Divorce Prep Experts can save lives,” she said.




:x :x

WHY EEM GET MARRIED WHEN YOU GOT PAPER?

I hate prenups/divorce in general, but whats so surprising in this article?
She was "coerced" into signing a prenup which will void it.
Dude didn't do what he said he would do in prenup, also would void it.
Prenup was voided so she got half which is what you expect from the courts.
 
Last edited:
Stumbled upon this article yesterday, figured it'd eventually make it's way on here.

Before anyone goes on an anti-woman rant, READ the article first; READ CAREFULLY.

He tried to play her, and got what he deserved.

Support the wife 100% in this case.




...
 
Last edited:
^^^^ he tried to play her?

She had 4 days, famb...

So tired of people treating women like naive babies...
 
Stumbled upon this article yesterday, figured it'd eventually make it's way on here.

Before anyone goes on an anti-woman rant, READ the article first; READ CAREFULLY.

He tried to play her, and got what he deserved.

Support the wife 100% in this case.




...
Yup, dude lost when he made all those "promises"

Sucks for successful dudes who want families but women only see $$$
mean.gif
 
He promised he would void the prenup at the birth of their first kid
:lol: @ a verbal agreement 15 years prior holding up in a million dollar court case...

Why didn't she ask to put that in the prenuptial? And who's to say she didn't make it up?
 
I assumed they were written agreements for them to be used in court. If it was just some sweet talk to get her to sign 15 years ago then that judge must've wanted the yambs.
 
:lol: @ a verbal agreement 15 years prior holding up in a million dollar court case...

Why didn't she ask to put that in the prenuptial? And who's to say she didn't make it up?

There is no mention of any verbal agreements. Only agreements mentioned were the ones included in the prenuptial agreement. The fact that they both signed it sorta says she didn't make it up? lol
 
Last edited:
^^^^ he tried to play her?

She had 4 days, famb...

So tired of people treating women like naive babies...
Do you know how much stress goes on 4 days prior to the wedding? Neither party is thinking clearly, especially the woman since she does about 95% of the planning.

I support the wife here since he had a lot of time to get the prenup in order before they got married. She was naive in many cases here though since she signed it without certain points being in the contract, and he was naive to think that something signed when all the arrangements were in order would be upheld.
 
Cosign whoever said the law treats women like naive 10 year olds from birth all the way until they are dead. What exactly is an adult women according to the law, and what actions should they be responsible for
 
http://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/wif...e-to-overturn-prenup-agreement-182017682.html



Wife of Millionaire Wins "Unprecedented" Case to Overturn Prenup Agreement
By Beth Greenfield, Shine Staff


PostsBy Beth Greenfield, Shine Staff | Love + Sex – 23 hours agoEmail0Share1944Print
"I wanted people to see how I felt," Cioffi-Petrakis said of the video she made (see bottom of post for full video). …A Long Island mother of three has become a postnuptial hero, after a prenup nearly cost her everything. In a landmark case, Elizabeth Cioffi-Petrakis, 39, won an appeal overturning a bizarre premarital agreement with her millionaire husband. Now she says she may be entitled to half of her ex’s worth when their divorce becomes final.

The win, say matrimonial law experts, is huge.

More on Shine: What I Wish I Knew Before I Got Divorced

“This is unprecedented in the family law world,” celebrity divorce lawyer Vikki Ziegler told Yahoo! Shine. “This is a landmark decision that will likely be litigated a great deal in the future in similar cases for those who feel their prenups are unconscionable.”

So how did it happen?

“I won it because I pretty much did it myself,” Cioffi-Petrakis told Yahoo! Shine. “I had three prior attorneys who messed up my case big-time. And I was pretty much dead in the water until I got educated.”

More on Yahoo!: Why You Should Say "I Do" to a Prenup

To win the case, Cioffi-Petrakis had to prove in a Long Island court that her husband, commercial property developer Peter Petrakis, coerced her into signing the prenup. She claims he dropped the premarital bomb four days before their wedding day in 1998, leaving her with little time for a contractual dispute. She also told the court the agreement included promises her ex never intended to keep. Among those promises, she said, was that he would add her name to the deed of their Old Brookville home, and that he would destroy the prenup after the birth of their first child.


Peter Petrakis. Photo: ADRIEL REBOH/ PatrickMcMullan.com“He claimed he was just protecting his business, and that his lawyers made him have a prenup,” Cioffi-Petrakis said. “And me, a naïve young girl, I believed it.” She added that she’d been with Petrakis since she was 18 years old—six years before they were married—and that she was so committed that she’d converted from Catholicism to his religion of Greek Orthodox.

“I loved him, I trusted him and I believed in his word,” she explained.

But when he did not put the house in her name, and when she first gave birth 12 years ago to twin boys (and then later to a daughter, now 8), the two began what would be come a years-long journey in and out of lawyers’ offices to contest the prenuptial agreement.

Then finally, in January, a judge ruled in Cioffi-Petrakis’s favor, finding that she had successfully proven what is called “fraud by the inducement” in a contract. To do that, Cioffi-Petrakis explained, she presented the court with “patterns of behavior” to show that Petrakis “was not honest when he made the promises.”

Ziegler, author of “The Pre-Marital Planner,” further explained the court’s decision to Shine. “Many couples discuss the terms of their prenups and say they will do or say things in the future that are not memorialized in writing,” she said. “However, this fraudulent inducement to buy a house, put the marital home in joint name and make other financial incentives after the parties wed appeared to sway the appellate panel who agreed to set aside the prenuptial agreement based on fraud.”

Petrakis did not return a message left for him by Shine at one of his businesses, the One Stop Smoke Shop in Seaford, Long Island. His lavish Old Brookville home was featured in a 2010 New York Times story, “Over-the-Top Houses,” described as a “newly renovated shingle and stone farm ranch on 2.29 acres,” and equipped with a “lower-level nightclub” featuring a 24-foot onyx bar, 1,200-bottle wine cellar and a DJ booth. His chain of smoke shops, according to the New York Post, is worth “at least $5 million.”

Cioffi-Petrakis told Shine that she (with much help from her parents) shelled out nearly $475,000 in lawyers’ fees over the years, and that her husband has paid more than $600,000. “And we haven’t even gotten to the divorce,” she said. Despite the fact that the couple have been estranged since 2010 when Petrakis first filed for divorce, the proceedings were put on hold by the court until the the prenup matter could be settled. Now the two will be able to move ahead to make their split official.

The pressure of the case pushed her to extremes. “I almost took my own life because of the depression and stresses,” she said. “I wound up in the hospital with a nervous breakdown.”

A positive outcome of the ordeal, though, has been Cioffi-Petrakis starting her own business, Divorce Prep Experts, a divorce-court advisement service, which has been slowly getting off the ground since 2008.

“I’m not a lawyer, but I think I have advocated for myself better than any lawyer has,” she said. “My mission is to empower and protect anyone in this position. I know what to look out for, and I bring reputable professionals together to help.” Her company, she said, offers her clients invaluable advice and knowledge from judges, mediators, divorce coaches and child psychologists, in the hopes of saving time and money through the divorce process.

“Divorce Prep Experts can save lives,” she said.




:x :x

WHY EEM GET MARRIED WHEN YOU GOT PAPER?

i fox w/ you ricky but, he did her dirty w/ the broken promises. his own fault.

so yeah...you can still have paper, get married, be legit in your prenuptual agreement and would be well in the case of a divorce. this is his own mistake, no need to question marriage for rich men.
 
I don't understand, pre-nup or no pre-nup, why does she deserve any of this money? I mean I've heard some arguments about maintaining a "quality of life", the wife is used to, but are there any better arguments out there? This may come off as sexist, but that's like saying she got used to living as a lazy woman.



The pressure of the case pushed her to extremes. “I almost took my own life because of the depression and stresses,” she said. “I wound up in the hospital with a nervous breakdown.”

>D
 
Last edited:
Don't make promises you can't keep.

He shouldn't have agreed to those stipulations if he wasn't going to follow through with them.
 
^^^^ he tried to play her?

She had 4 days, famb...

So tired of people treating women like naive babies...


4 days!!!

You really are of the opinion that 4 days is sufficient enough time for a person to peruse a complex legal contract/document?

Let's not even factor in the fact that this was 4 days before she was supposed to get married, meaning she--the bride--had a **** load of things running through her mind at the time.

4 days, he says...:smh:; your disgustingly obvious bias is preventing you from thinking rationally.





...
 
I don't see where it says any of thhe agreements were written down.

Maybe my comprehension game is off.
 
I don't understand, pre-nup or no pre-nup, why does she deserve any of this money? I mean I've heard some arguments about maintaining a "quality of life", the wife is used to, but are there any better arguments out there? This may come off as sexist, but that's like saying she got used to living as a lazy woman.

I don't know if their state is a community property state or what their laws are...but think of it this way -- She had kids with him right? What would his earning potential have been had he been a single father without his wife? What kind of stuff did she do around the house while he was at work? What if she was a good wife and took care of the house, took care of the kids, cooked/cleaned? Would it be OK to just leave her with nothing?

I'm not saying I agree with it, in the end, I don't really care. I'm just saying there is a legitimate argument out there. I can see why a woman who has dedicated her life to a marriage for a certain amount of years would feel like she is owed something if there is a divorce.
 
I don't see where it says any of thhe agreements were written down.

Maybe my comprehension game is off.

Texas, for example, recognizes oral contracts. Although there are exceptions to this rule. Contracts/family law varies state by state, so we'd have to know what the wife/husband state's law is.
 
I don't understand, pre-nup or no pre-nup, why does she deserve any of this money? I mean I've heard some arguments about maintaining a "quality of life", the wife is used to, but are there any better arguments out there? This may come off as sexist, but that's like saying she got used to living as a lazy woman.



The pressure of the case pushed her to extremes. “I almost took my own life because of the depression and stresses,” she said. “I wound up in the hospital with a nervous breakdown.”

grin.gif
This was not a normal prenup though. This was an attempt to coerce her into signing it when she as not of right mind. Anyone who has been married knows that the bride does not think rationally for at least 2 weeks prior to the wedding. At that point, she's going to do whatever it takes to salvage her perfect day, even if it takes signing a legal document with certain oral agreements. If they were eloping, then it would be a different story since they weren't planning anything ahead.
 
I don't understand, pre-nup or no pre-nup, why does she deserve any of this money? I mean I've heard some arguments about maintaining a "quality of life", the wife is used to, but are there any better arguments out there? This may come off as sexist, but that's like saying she got used to living as a lazy woman.



The pressure of the case pushed her to extremes. “I almost took my own life because of the depression and stresses,” she said. “I wound up in the hospital with a nervous breakdown.”

>D

That's her reward for successfully trapping a wealthy man.
 
I don't know if their state is a community property state or what their laws are...but think of it this way -- She had kids with him right? What would his earning potential have been had he been a single father without his wife? What kind of stuff did she do around the house while he was at work? What if she was a good wife and took care of the house, took care of the kids, cooked/cleaned? Would it be OK to just leave her with nothing?

I'm not saying I agree with it, in the end, I don't really care. I'm just saying there is a legitimate argument out there. I can see why a woman who has dedicated her life to a marriage for a certain amount of years would feel like she is owed something if there is a divorce.

Wait I'm not saying she should get NOTHING, but "half"? I think these things should be based on the woman's earning potential BEFORE marriage. A lot of these "millionaire wives" that end up taking half of their husband's stuff don't really cook or clean either and some are bad mothers. This should be looked at on a case to case basis instead of being so quick to give a woman half of the man's assets. Ain't no cook or cleaner worth millions of dollars.

I am all for giving her something to live "comfortably", and an allowance for the children but some of these numbers getting thrown around.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom