Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (50691)	6/12/2002 6:50:25 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Actually many people litigate with their own family members. In estates and trusts/probate law you run into the MOST disturbing cases involving families. So I'd say you have a flawed premise there. And of course people are CONSTANTLY litigating against their family members in divorce- which is quite common- at least in the US.

To: Solon who wrote (50691)	6/12/2002 7:47:03 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

Clearly, few of us would litigate against our own family members. Huh?? In what world do you live? Not the world of a family lawyer, I assure you. And such litigation is often the most contentious there is. The first thing my estate planning teacher said, after Good Morning, was: "Never think you know somebody until you have divided an estate with them." To which I would add, or until you have tried to decide who gets the family pet in a divorce. Usually you can get parents to be reasonable about the children by stressing that the kids have to live with this, and they as adults have an obligation to work out their relationship for the sake of the kids But nobody feels they have to take a pet's feelings into account. You want contentious and bitter? You ain't seen nothing until you've seen one of the pet battles. I wasn't the lawyer for the case, but I know of a divorce which was totally agreed on except for the dog. They signed off on everything else and then spent a combined $17,000 going to court litigating over the dog. Don't ask how you can spend that much arguing over a dog. Just realize that, yes, there are pet psychologists who for a large fee will testify about which owner would be better for this pet. And when you get several of the testifying on each side, well, let's just say that the costs mount. But as to whether people will sue their family members, well, if they didn't, I'd have to find some other line of work.