Comments on: Jilted bride sues ex-groom

By: Ted Frank

Ted Frank — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 13:06:32 +0000

Bill: if litigation over wedding expenses occurs X% of the time, and the cost of negotiating and drafting a wedding contract is Y% of the wedding expenses, then it wouldn’t be wise if Y > X, as it probably is. The reason this story is news is because such lawsuits are extraordinarily rare; very few relationships break up in the month or two before the wedding, and very few of those break up so raucously that the parties can’t come to an agreement or understanding on the handling of the wedding costs.

By: Bill Poser

Bill Poser — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 04:55:25 +0000

Wouldn’t it be wise to include the handling of the wedding expenses in the marriage contract, and to require a marriage contract as a condition of a marriage license?

By: Brian G.

Brian G. — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 02:47:17 +0000

I’d be willing to bet he got scared off by her Bridezilla impression. She sounds incredibly high maintenance.

By: Jay Markowitz

Jay Markowitz — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 03:54:52 +0000

Looks like another case of putting all your energy into the wedding but nothing into the marriage itself.

This would have put a different spin on movies such as ‘Runaway Bride.

By: Richard Nieporent

Richard Nieporent — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:37:25 +0000

This looks like a case for Judge Judy!

By: Leafs

Leafs — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:22:27 +0000

http://www.suntimes.com/news/3211207-418/salerno-wedding-bride-suit-buttitta.html

This is going to get ugly as the runaway groom lets he reveals his allegations why he ran like hell. I think Ted’s idea for a reality show featuring these two is spot on.

By: CTrees

CTrees — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:05:21 +0000

This was an episode of Boston Legal. First season, and I’m pretty sure there was a bet involved (based on if Alan Shore could win the case).

Actually, in that case, the bride was left at the altar, rather than being dumped shortly before the wedding, so the fictional bride probably would’ve had a slightly better distress claim.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 15:43:06 +0000

@Malcolm Smith: Traditionally, the price of the wedding is paid by the bride’s family. That means there’s no incentive–other than what Mom & Dad provide–to tone things down.

I do know parents who have paid their daughters $10K or more to elope in order to avoid the expense of full-blown, every-girl’s-dream weddings.

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 14:47:34 +0000

It strikes me as funny that whereever I read comments, as here, the lead cry is about the cost of the wedding.

I am surprised that to so many a mere $100K seems grossly extravagant for a wedding.

(I am not really surprised at the level of animosity extended to the bride, as if she was dropped almost literally at the altar because of her spending and such an action by the putative groom was reasonable and non-compensable.)

By: Malcolm Smith

Malcolm Smith — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 05:07:34 +0000

Why, in the name of heaven, do people go in for such extragantly expensive weddings in the first place? And if they do, don’t the couple sit down beforehand to discuss the cost, bearing in mind that it is going to come out of their joint finances?
If they do, however, I suppose someone would have to pay if the engagement was broken. What about the tradition that the bride’s parents pay for the wedding? In such a circumstance, surely they would have a better right to sue.