Jamie McCourt, top, and Frank McCourt, bottom, arrive at the courthouse in LA
If yesterday's opening arguments are any indication, the divorce trial of Frank and Jamie McCourt could prove to be pretty contentious. At stake is the ownership of the Los Angeles Dodgers, the team Frank bought when his bid to buy the BoSox failed. Jamie is seeking part-ownership of the team despite signing a document in 2004 that gave her the couple's considerable real-estate holdings and Frank sole ownership of the Dodgers and the ballpark they play in. Jamie has claimed she didn't know what she was signing - a claim Frank's attorney, Steve Susman, yesterday characterized as "incredible" and "unbelievable," according to USA Today. (There was a whole phalanx of high-priced lawyers in the courtroom: Frank has six attorneys and Jamie has five.) Susman claimed Jamie wanted to back out of the agreement because it would inhibit her ability to run for public office, perhaps for mayor of Los Angeles, governor of California, or even president of the United States. “She realized she needed the Dodgers as her platform to accomplish this,” said Susman. Meanwhile, Jamie's divorce lawyer, Dennis Wasser, argued that Frank and his legal eagle Larry Silverstein had altered the document signed by Jamie to deceive her. Wasser quoted, of all people, Sir Walter Scott. ""Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!" This is not a jury trial. It is being heard by Superior Court Judge Scott M. Gordon, a former Santa Monica policeman and a member of the prosecution team in the O.J. Simpson murder case.
About this blog
Follow on Twitter: @GlobeNames, @MarkAShanahan
Follow on Twitter: @GlobeNames, @MeredithGoldste