Jamie McCourt Wins L.A. Dodgers Divorce Case, So What Happens Next?
The Los Angeles Times reported this morning Jamie McCourt, estranged wife of Frank McCourt, has won the the divorce case, giving her the title of "partner" in ownership of the Los Angeles Dodgers.
The case has dragged on through a series of court dates, mediations and appeals, before "Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Scott Gordon granted Jamie McCourt's plea to throw out a 2004 marital agreement that would have left her without an ownership share in the Dodgers."
The ruling breaks down this way: Jamie McCourt now has a percentage of the team and the organization as a whole becomes part of her financial assets.
When sifting through all the media reports, text, and politics of the matter, the basic principles are difficult to find.
Frank McCourt will now have to pursue other legal avenues if he plans to contest his ex-wife in this matter, while Jamie will discuss what to do with her share of the team. It is unclear what motives Jamie has for the team, or if she will remain with the organization at all.
There is a possibility Jamie contested her lack of ownership because she sees a profitable investment from the venture as The Dodgers have had the second highest attendance number in Major League Baseball for years, right behind the Yankees and play in the countries second largest city. Winning her share of the team means she can either fight through legislation for years and profit from the income, or sell her stake of the team for one massive dollar amount to the highest bidder, or to Frank.
The ruling in favor of Jamie by no means ends the feud, or any problems the organization might run into during the upcoming years of litigation that is sure to follow. On the bright side, daily operations and payroll will not be immediately affected by this small resolution.
For example, Vicente Padilla was signed today to a one-year deal worth $2 million, pending a physical. Dodgers GM Ned Colletti said he planned to increase the payroll, and has done so. With just a couple tweaks of the existing roster, the Dodgers may be just fine while the small army of McCourt legislators handle the issue behind the scenes.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?