Transcription
Imagine thinking that you found the love of your life in Brazil. You sponsor her to move to the US. Yes, something like a passport, bro. And you move her into your home in Hawaii where the both of you decide to rent out your extra rooms, start an Airbnb business in both your names, thinking you're both going to build some type of a business empire, only to have the cops show up twice to drag her out of your house. Why? Because you got married to a woman who's completely out of her mind. So much so that the second time the cops show up to physically remove her from your house, she ends up disappearing for several months only to show up for this court date right here. To do what, you may be asking? Well, to fight the only smart thing that you did in this situation, which was get a prenuptual agreement.
>> Drink the coffee. It'll make you feel better.
>> No more wasting time. Check it out.
>> Uh Mr. Mr. Manusco has a prenuptual agreement that both parties signed in Hawaii um where Mr. Manusco lives and he would just like some testimony on what property uh he would like divided by the court today as well.
>> All right, Miss Manusco, what is do you want to give your opening statement now or?
>> Uh your honor, good morning. Um I will um I filed for a motion of continuence for this case because I am totally interested in continue this case with the proper legal advice and legal aid that I am allowed by law to represent and the reason I did not answer to this case in the proper time is that I was losing my job in that time and I couldn't pay for a lawyer. I kindly request my petition to be approved in this morning. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um,
>> I just want to give you guys a bit of context here. Her husband had to literally hire private investigators to look for her after she took off with his jeep that was in his name. Also, house happens to be in his name as well and protected within the prenupture agreement. Notice how she has no legal representation. That is also most likely due to the prenup. Because in many cases, if let's say he didn't have a prenuptual agreement, she probably would have representation that he would be expected to pay. She can't afford a lawyer because he's protected himself with a prenup within the marriage. Understood. Let's keep watching.
>> So, you said you filed a continuance.
>> Yes. and I have a copy and it is um it's it's stamped by the court and I emailed to the opposing party as well to to the lawyer.
>> All right. So, Mr. Star, she's made a general appearance so it's not going to be
>> I I would still like to go forward today. U Mr. Manusco has been they lived in Hawaii. Um his wife left some time ago and he he had to hire people to try and find her. He's been waiting on this divorce for a long time and she was served in February. That's a long I mean that's a long time to get a lawyer and file anything. If she was able to file a continuance, she should have been able to file a general answer, I believe.
>> All right. So, both parties have given their opening. You may proceed Mr. Star.
>> Thank you. Uh, first some general questions. Mr. Manusco, what was the date to the best of your knowledge of your marriage? uh July 14th, 2018.
>> Okay. And what was the date of your separation?
>> Uh June 1st, 2022.
>> Okay. And at that time when you separated, did your wife leave the marital residence and and go to another state?
>> Um she did. She was uh removed by the police from the residence.
>> Okay. And you actually have a protective order on your wife currently, don't you? An active one.
>> That's correct.
>> Okay. And when does that expire to your knowledge?
>> Uh, November of this year.
>> Okay. Now, did you have do you know where your wife went after that?
>> Um, I'm aware now that she's in Texas.
>> Okay. And so you believe she's been living there since then, correct?
>> Uh, correct. Um, has the marriage become insupportable due to discord or a conflict of personalities that destroys the legitimate ends of the marriage relationship?
>> Yes.
>> Is there any reasonable expectation of reconciliation with your wife?
>> No.
>> Now, you don't have a final decree. Um, but you have you had a prenuptual agreement. Is that correct?
>> That's correct.
>> Okay. And that's her signature and your signature on the prenuptual agreement.
>> That's correct.
>> Okay. Okay. And did you guys alter that in any way when you submitted it to me? Okay. Um, your honor, I would like to offer petitioners exhibit P- 0001 into evidence the prenuptual agreement signed in Hawaii.
>> Any objection, Miss Miss Fund?
>> Okay. What's your objection?
>> This prenup was made in a scratch. It was it was signed by both. It has the scratches. It was not legalized. And I don't think a document like that could be a valid prenup. It was not signed by an or a lawyer. And it was it is totally a scratch.
>> I hope you guys are following how she's attempting to invalidate the prenupture agreement. She's literally saying that the prenup can't stand valid because it has scratches. I mean, talk about desperate. The coffee pot is backed by fathershaveights.com. The ultimate prenup prep guide for men who value marriage in our modernday future husbands. The divorce industry makes billions when men walk into a lawyer's office unprepared. Don't let the system profit from your ignorance. My step-by-step guide at fathershave.com created with expert attorneys James Ston and the lead attorney hands you the questions, checklists, and strategy to walk in 10 steps ahead. And it costs only a couple of dinner dates. Click the link pinned to the top of the comment section. Secure your future and join the hundreds of men preparing their marriages the right way. Desperate because the prenup has scratches on it. Even though she signed it and he signed it, she wants to now paint it as invalid. The other thing I want you guys to pay attention to as well is he did something, and I'm talking about the husband here. He did something that women typically do in these type of situations. This may be due to her not really understanding how laws work here in the US, but he filed a protective order. And when it comes to that type of stuff, it's typically whoever does it first. How many times you guys seen a video of a guy who gets kicked out of his house because the woman claims that he was being abusive. Now, you may say, "Was he?" I don't know. Depends. If you ask the court, that range of abuse is very broad. It could be anything from breaking some glass, um, being emotionally abusive. You know, we've expanded the definition of abusive, and more men are deciding to tap into those definitions as well for their own advantage to use the system the way it's been used against many men.
>> Mr. Star, your response?
>> Um, well, it's an opposing party statement, your honor. And they they're both of sound mind.
>> Are they
>> going into the marriage and and parties are able to contract among themselves and this is a contract between two parties?
>> You want to put it on the screen?
>> Okay. Here you are, your honor. It's on the screen.
>> All right.
>> Um, I mean, it's made in the state of Hawaii, signed by both parties. If you look at the bottom here,
>> so you won't be able to see a lot of this because it's censored private information, okay?
>> Contract between both parties. And then the statutes of Hawaii regarding prenuptual agreements say that these are enforceable and that they are enforceable even without any consideration as well. It's also it should be in your box as well, your honor.
>> Is that your signature there, Miss Fanaeka, as you have signed there?
>> Objection.
>> Okay, you've already made your objection. We're just deciding now whether this is proper to enter into evidence. Is that your signature?
>> It is, but why is not showing the scratch part?
>> We're asking specifically there's a on above there's property of the parties. This house and you'll hear testimony from Mr. Manusco is separate property um that he owns with two of his other family members before the marriage. Is that correct, Mr. Manusco? as well as I described.
>> That is correct.
>> There's a house in Hawaii that you're asking to be deemed your separate property. Is that correct?
>> That's correct.
>> Do you own that house in its entirety?
>> I do not.
>> Who else do you own it with?
>> Um, there are several mortgages as well as my parents on the deed.
>> So, you own it with And your name is on the mortgage?
>> That's correct.
>> Is her name is your wife's name on the mortgage?
>> It is not. Are there any vehicles that you're wanting as uh awarded to you?
>> Uh yes, there are.
>> What vehicle is that sir?
>> There is uh a Toyota Highlander and a Jeep Wrangler.
>> I'm going to stop screen sharing, your honor. Um now, are you in possession of both of those vehicles?
>> I am not.
>> Okay. What vehicle are you in possession?
>> Uh I'm in possession of the Toyota Highlander.
>> Okay. And is your name on the deed to that?
>> It is.
>> Is your wife's name on the deed to that?
>> It is not.
>> Okay. Did you own it before the marriage? You bought it during the marriage?
>> Yes.
>> Um, the Jeep Wrangler, is your name on the deed to that car?
>> It is.
>> Okay. Are you in possession of it?
>> I am not.
>> Okay. Who is in possession of that vehicle to your knowledge?
>> Um, neither myself nor the respondent.
>> Okay. Um, did she take it with her when she left Hawaii?
>> Uh, she took it with her when she was removed from the house. Yes.
>> Okay. Is that the car she normally drove though?
>> It is.
>> Okay. Um, is there a a note on that car? Like a a loan?
>> There is a a outstanding loan on the vehicle.
>> Okay. Whose whose name is that in?
>> That is in my name.
>> In your name only.
>> In my name only. So, he's been paying for the car, the Jeep that she drove off with and making payments on that because it's in his name and probably would affect his credit, so on and so forth. And she took it knowing that he would keep on paying for it. Let's see how she responds.
>> Okay. Are you asking for possession or the right to repossess that vehicle,
>> pay off that loan? In the alternative, if the judge, because the judge's job is to make an equitable distribution of the estate, are you saying, would you say that in the alternative, she be responsible for that debt on that vehicle since she took the vehicle?
>> Yes.
>> Now, did you file a proposed property division?
>> I did.
>> Okay. Are you asking the court to make that an order of of what you want in a proposed property division that you filed?
>> That's correct. Yes.
>> Okay. And I'd like to offer that into evidence as a record of his testimony. It's labeled as P002 and it's in your box as well.
>> All right. You want to bring it up on the screen, please, so she can look at it.
>> Yes. Okay. So, you filed this with the court, correct?
>> Uh, your office did, correct?
>> Okay. Well, on on your behalf, so you you did.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> And then we see the the Jeep Wrangler 2017 and the Highlander here. And you owe about $10,000. Is that your testimony on the Jeep Wrangler?
>> Uh the debt balance is about 22,000.
>> And then the market value is 11,000. What are you basing that off of?
>> Uh this was uh based on a Kelly Blue Book value. Um again, the condition of the vehicle is is unknown.
>> Now, your wife has a Bank of Hawaii savings account. Is that correct?
>> Uh I'm basing this information on the previous information provided to the Hawaii courts.
>> Okay. So are you asking when petitioners exhibit 002?
>> All right. Miss do you um any objection to the admission of petitioners exhibit 2? It's just his argument really. They're really kind of demonstrative and not true evidence. But do you have any objection to this admission?
>> I totally do. She totally does.
>> I The Jeep value is not 11,000. That Jeep, if you see on the market, you can sell that Jeep for 32 or 34,000.
>> That would be something that you could put on as evidence. And you know, I hadn't sworn you yet, and I did ask you about that on your signature. So, I'll have to ask you that again, or somebody will because you weren't sworn yet when I asked you that. But um that's really not a legal objection. Any other objection um about this because see you can come back on your testimony after you're sworn in and say, "Well, that's not the value of the Jeep." But that doesn't negate the admission of the evidence. You guys are seeing in real time the difference between having legal representation and being a man who prepares and taking the steps to protect yourself versus being a deer in headlights, which is what this chick is right now. Pretty much decided to represent herself cuz she can't afford an attorney and she doesn't even know how to conduct herself correctly within the court hearing. I mean, I wouldn't know how to properly do this. I would not rely on my own knowledge. Of course, I would hire an expert attorney. which is really just a demo.
>> There is a Jeep and there is a Highlander. Uh those both were acquired during the marriage. The none of these cars had an actual debt. They are all paid off.
>> All right. Petitioners, exhibit two is admitted.
>> Thank you.
>> All right. He may proceed, sir.
>> Mr. Manusco, the 401ks that you're asking the court to award in your name, are those something you earn through your employment?
>> That's correct.
>> Okay. And these aren't from your wife's jobs. You're not asking to take her 401ks from her jobs. Is that correct?
>> That's correct.
>> And then all these unsecured debts, you're asking court to award those in your name as well.
>> That's correct.
>> Now, are there any children born or adopted during the marriage who are currently under the age of 18?
>> There are not. Thank goodness.
>> Okay.
>> And just to kind of reiterate, you're asking the court to award you the house is separate property. Is there anything else that you think the court needs to hear today?
>> Um, just in regards to the Jeep, um, uh, I have, uh, not, uh, seen or been in possession of that Jeep since, uh, our separation, uh, almost two years ago. Um, I have heard from friends who have seen this around town and I've been provided pictures that uh someone um not the respondent nor myself have been driving that Jeep around illegally towing um watercraft around with it. Um I've um been insuring this vehicle um and this is liability to me.
>> Wow. Paying insurance too. This commenter says, "So she basically used them for citizenship with the laughing emojis." Yeah. And you know, this is why I personally like to to men who want to go abroad, whether you identify as a pass or whatever. My advice is always just don't bring him back, right? Don't bring it back to the place that will brainwash these chicks into extreme feminism. And I just need to uh make sure this uh either comes back into my possession um or uh gets my name removed um from that and I cannot do that without a a divorce degree.
>> Okay. And then
>> and I don't I'm not real sure Jeep or whoever financed it would agree to remove you. Right.
>> Yeah. I've had problems dealing with this.
>> Well, I mean, isn't that the law, Mr. Star? They can show a divorce decree awarding, you know, a debt to somebody all day long, but you know, they're still going to go after, right? Or am I wrong?
>> Yeah. No, I believe you're correct, Mr. Manusco. The alternative, if you can't get your if if your wife can't refinance the Jeep or return the Jeep to you, are you asking for a judgment for the amount of money that you owe on the Jeep?
>> That's correct.
>> Okay.
>> Of course, she's going to have to pay back what he would have to pay. If they're not going to take that loan out of his name, she would have to pay him back for that. It's only fair. Um, now except for the G, are you asking the court to award you the personal property in your possession and to award your wife the personal property in her possession?
>> Correct.
>> Okay. Do you think the court needs to hear anything on the protective order or the issues that arose around that?
>> Um, nope. I would just uh like to to get this matter uh the divorce completed before the um restraining order expires.
>> Smell looks traumatized.
>> Point. Miss FCA, you may ask questions of Mr. Montesuko. You may proceed.
>> Sorry, how do you pronounce your last name? Montesuko. Can I ask question? Sorry. Uh your
>> You're asking questions of your husband.
>> Commenter here says, "My English not so good. She learned how to say I want and I deserve pretty good
>> at this point.
>> That is your
>> that is since you're representing yourself, this is called cross-examination. So you get to ask him questions about basically anything.
>> Jordan Monusco, um do you remember that the day I left the house, you told me to leave the house, not the police. You kicked me out of the house with cruelty and no pity. You did not care about my well-being in your country because I
>> lacks personal knowledge of of what he thought
>> overruled. But that's three questions in a row. Ask one question and wait for the answer. Then asking us so it's compound. I would have granted that um objection, but start over and ask one by one, not you know a whole bunch together. Jordan, the day we separated, did you kick me out of the house? And there is a video of it. Yes or no? The
>> police remove you from the house that day?
>> No. He told me to left the house.
>> Objection. This is That's not a question.
>> Sustained. You can only at this time ask questions. You're going to have your chance to testify on direct examination in your case and chief or if Mr. Star calls you and hits. So just at this time, the way that the law is is that you can ask questions. Just keep asking questions. Anything that you want the court to know.
>> Jordan, do I was paying the Jeep with Turo payments every month?
>> Payments were made for approximately the first year of the Jeep ownership and then they ceased. And that was from our mutual LLC that we both contributed to. The LLC that you created was during the marriage. Yes or no?
>> Yes.
>> Does the debt on the Jeep you paid it from the loan from the LLC account? You paid it off the Jeep from the LLC money.
>> The Jeep is not paid off. Monthly payments were made from the LLC account that we created together.
>> So, I want you guys to realize it when it came to the Airbnb situation that they were running together. He did put her name on that LLC. The thing is though, I see that as a man who cuz cuz you guys got have to remember they didn't start out like this, right? Like most couples, you're thinking to yourself, okay, well, I'm protecting my house. I have my cars protected in this prenupture agreement. Let's build something together. Was probably the LLC. Put her name in it. And she believes because she really wasn't handling much of the finances that the Jeep is paid off. She thinks it was paid off because she didn't really have the burden of paying any major bills from what it sounded like. She helped with um cleaning and housekeeping, so on and so forth when running the Airbnb. That was the house that we're living in where they were renting out extra rooms. And that house of course is in his name. It sounds like uh his parents' name or some other family members there. So, she's like delusional believing that this Jeep is paid off. As I remember you told me one day, you say that the Jeep has been paid off because you received the loan money, the equity money. So the
>> objection that's not a question narrative.
>> Turn your statements into questions. You may you may try again. That objection is sustained.
>> Did you created the LLC during the marriage?
>> Correct. Yes.
>> Does we pay for the Jeep during the marriage? Both of us? The payments uh that were made on the Jeep came from uh the majority of them came from the income from the LLC. Not all of them. I made several payments and continued making payments after you ceased making them. Does the LLC How much money exactly did you receive from the LLC
>> during our marriage?
>> Uh me personally, zero. I did not take any money from the LLC. Uh used the money from the LLC to facilitate the payments that we made together, the car payments.
>> Why did you did not took me in consideration but added my name on the LLC and you did not include me on that LLC? Your name was included on the LLC. It was a two-member partnership.
>> It was during our marriage. Yes or no?
>> Yes.
>> Did I help you out with the Airbnb at the house with the Kalama Street house?
>> You did and you were compensated for doing so.
>> How many rooms are you renting right now in in Kalama Street?
>> One.
>> What happened with the other two?
>> I would object to the relevance of this because that house is separate property.
>> A rule.
>> The house is uh that there are several bedrooms in the house. She's even trying to somehow, it sounds like, get a piece of that house is what it sounds like. Why else would you be asking about the house where the business was ran when you know it's protected by the prenupture agreement?
>> So, your rental income is not what you declare on your statement. Your rental income, it is about $3,000 a month plus your salary. So, you are not declaring that you rent two extra units in that statement.
>> Uh, that's incorrect. I'm renting one bedroom.
>> And for how much?
>> Uh, it is currently unrened.
>> But how much are you asking for that unit for that for the studio right now?
>> Uh, up until last month, I was receiving 1,200 per month.
>> I have aware and I have proof that you are requesting 1,400 for the studio. It's not what you put in your statement. You are asking 14 lack of a question
>> for unit. Have you been fulfilling your obligations with the immigration law according to the form I 867?
>> Action to the relevance
>> overruled.
>> Jeran, have you been disregarding your immigration contract as a sponsor of myself in this country?
>> Question. Have you been there regarding your commitment with the federal law with immigration by caring and providing to someone that you bring to this country and you have not been fulfilling your obligations with the federal law?
>> I am fulfilling all of my obligations.
>> Not with the federal law.
>> Action for the lack of question.
>> She kind of may have a point there. I mean, if you sponsor somebody, one of the things that they promise you to do is show proof that you'll be able to take care of them and sort of help them out because the government doesn't want people who migrate here to rely on government assistance that is typically prioritized for actual citizens. But guys, don't forget the whole point here is for her to try and invalidate the prenupture agreement. It doesn't look like it's going to happen
>> of the Jeep at this moment as as your knowledge. What do you think is the total cost of the Jeep right now?
>> You mean cost or value?
>> How much you can get from the Jeep if you sell it?
>> Okay, that would be value, right?
>> Uh I have the Jeep's not been in my possession for nearly two years. Uh I don't know as ofs disposition or its value. Um, but my blue book value is what I listed in the in the documents.
>> And what was that again? Can you remind the court, please?
>> Uh, 11 or $12,000.
>> Thank you. You may proceed. That's not the value of the car.
>> And how much you paid for the Highlander in when you bought it?
>> Uh, the purchase price was $7,000.
>> How much do you pay or the jeep? How much was the value of the Jeep when we got it?
>> $34,000.
>> Scott here says she should be sent back with what she came with. Nothing.
>> We both we we both were maintaining the cost of the Jeep in one way or other way.
>> No, you had never personally contributed money to that account. However, I had on multiple occasions uh had either removed money from that account and it was not available to make the payments and pay for maintenance or otherwise.
>> Lisa says, "I'm not sure what possessed this man to get a prenup, but it was a very wise decision on his part. 2,000 plus likes for that comment." And someone responded back and says, "You should always get a prenup. really just the best thing to get.
>> Did I replace and I purchased the tires for the Jeep? Yes or no?
>> Objection asked and answered.
>> Sustained.
>> Did you recall Jordan kicking me out of the house?
>> Objection asked and answered.
>> Well, let her finish the question. Do you recall kicking me out of the house
>> several times? Using control and manipulation towards me? Yes or no?
>> Objection to argumentative on using control and manipulation.
>> Uh overruled.
>> Um you were only removed from the house twice. Um, that was the last two days that uh you were living here and both times were by the police.
>> That's not my question. I asked, do you remember kicking me out of the house with your words, with your own verbal words several times? Yes or no?
>> No. I recall asking you uh to leave multiple times because your behavior was unacceptable.
>> Do you think your behavior towards me was acceptable?
>> Absolutely.
>> So, you think you could have more control while you were treating me bad?
>> I mean, she she wants to argue. You know what I mean? Look at this guy's face. He's sitting there like, "Oh, man. Here we go again." and she wants to argue. You know what does it matter? It's like, did you were you being manipulative? She's going to say no. Do you think that you did the best thing you possibly could? She's going to say yes. She doesn't even know what she's doing here. And when it comes to law, the one thing I've realized is how important language is. What she already is lacking in that area. Representing herself is just literal legal um selfdeion. This commenter says, "The husband got very lucky that there have been no children born into the marriage." Yeah, this would be hell to deal with somebody else. She says, "The fact the cops removed her from the family home and approved a protection order says many things." I agree. And not having kids did really save this situation from being a lot lot worse. Imagine him being tied to this chick. You see her here representing herself. She probably thought she was going to put a dent into this prenupture agreement and believe she had some actual good points to make. Maybe she thought people feel bad for her. Didn't happen
>> with cruelty.
>> Objection argumentative
>> sustained. What gave you the power to kick me out of the house several times. Jordan,
>> again, I I asked you to leave when your behavior was disturbing myself and others to the point that we couldn't live peaceful lives. Why did you not live instead of me?
>> Because I that would not have solved the problem
>> and why me living will be solved the problem?
>> Because any tenants that we had at the time deserved a peaceful space free from yelling, slamming doors, throwing things and being physically.
>> So you could also leave the house, yes or no?
>> Um, no. I could not have left the house and been secure in providing a safe space for any tenants that were there.
>> So you cared to provide safe space for your tenants and people around you but not your wife.
>> Yes.
>> Correct.
>> You were absolutely provided a safe space. Um you made the safe un space unsafe for myself and others. You think that the multiple times that you have kicked me out of the house is a a power control
>> objection argument. The multiple times kicking me out of the house
>> sustained. I want just be fair and what the law entitled me to have or acquire from this marriage from all the emotional and physical damage that he caused me and also um all the prejudizes by me moving to this country. I'm not a professional. I could never make the money that he does. And I recently lost my previous job and I start a new job which I'm not doing any money. I don't have life. I don't have health insurance which is really important because he brought me to this country and there is an obligation with immigration law.
>> Boohoo. [Music] Boohoo. Now for those of you sitting there going, "Oh, that's so harsh." Do you think if he was in this situation and she had the power that she would have sat there and gone, "Oh yeah, you know what? Um, never mind. Let's just give you half of the house. Let's just take care of you." Ah, she would have cleaned this man for everything that he had. And so he did the smart thing beforehand, which was protect himself
>> about my well-being in this country until I am willing to make a certain amount of money by year. And I am not in that range right now. And that's why I require some support from all this damage that he caused on me. This court hearing or this hearing to be fair and I would like to continuous I know you denied my request but I could prove and I could state that some of these things that he declares are not true. I
>> can I ask you a question? Where is the jeep?
>> In Hawaii.
>> It's in Hawaii. Who has possession of it?
>> It's just parked at my friend's house.
>> Okay. And what is the name of your friend?
>> Marco. Marco Ernnandez. Fern Fernandez. Sorry. Fernandez. All right. Let's go to closing argument, Mr. Star.
>> Uh, yes. So, considering that the Jeep is testimony says it's in Hawaii and Mr. Manusco's testimony said he has a loan on that, he's been paying on that, I'd like that awarded to him. Um the prenuptual agreement has been signed by both parties. Both parties testified that's their signature, right?
>> And it states that Mr. Manisco's house uh is his separate property. And I believe he also stated it was purchased before the marriage as well.
>> Um and so we we'd like you to declare that separate property. Um and we'd also like you to declare the petitioners exhibit two um grant the relief requested by Mr. minus on the property division. We believe that's fair and equitable. He's taking a lot of debts. Um, and it really seems like as well that he's kind of been paying a lot of debts on things and trying to make it they've been separated for two years as well. So, they've gone their separate ways. Uh, you've heard testimony about I guess their feelings on each other. Um, and Miss Pekka has a has a job in in Austin, Texas that she's been living for the appropriate amount of time uh for the court to have jurisdiction. Um, I think we'd just like the relief granted.
>> Your closing argument, Miss Vona,
>> my argument?
>> Yes. What would you like the court to do? I would like uh the court to grant me safety and security in this country by having health insurance provided by my husband my from
>> why is she calling him Of course she is right she's going to look at him he's look at his face he's like my husband you're really going to call me that after everything you did this man's gone do it
>> because I moved here and I now have no family, no nothing here and I need to start my life. It's been causing me a lot of debts and lot of payments. I paid lawyers in the past. I pay my apartment monthly. I pay I need to get a car from our work for my work. I need to start all over again a new life. And I also that's why I request life insurance, health insurance. Sorry. I also would like to be granted part of the LLC money because that was during our marriage and that was our plan to invest in something together. Plus, I help him running the Airbnb and paying for his monthly payments from Kalama Street from that house. I help it taking care of the of the tenants of the Airbnb people.
>> All right, that's it, guys. That's as much as I can take. Um, it's not happening. It's not Well, let's listen. Let's listen.
>> I helped with the yard. I helped painting the house. I helped improving the house for
>> I almost gave up the rental income that he was making. So, I will be gr I would like to have granted some of that money from the LLC. Also, I am also willing to take some depth and also be part of the Kalama Street house and also I would like to see and I would like to have the total value of the Jeep in my name.
>> Court's going to take this matter under advisement. I'm going to ask Mr. star to draft a decree, a proposed decree, and send it to the court clerk in word um editable and copy um uh Miss Monesco on on that communication. How long would it We're off the record. How long would it take for you, Mr. Shara, to
>> Yeah, she's not getting anything at all.
>> get that thrown together. If you give me a couple weeks, I can probably get it done. The issue is our firm closes on the last week of this month for a kind of a CL the whole office closes. So, no parallegals or anything. Could you give me till the 7th of next month and I can
>> sure get pushed through?
>> All right. All right. And just be sure to copy Miss Fonka so she can, you know, make comments um if she wants.
>> And Mr. Star, you'll email that to me, Ali Leam. I was CCed on the email from which you got the link.
>> Okay, thank you. I'll do that.
>> All right, your honor.
>> Yes.
>> Would you just repeat me what what will happen after this hearing? Just my English is not 100% accurate.
>> Well, um based on the testimony,
>> here we go.
>> And the documents of the prenuptual agreement for one I haven't completely looked at. Um, petitioners exhibit two was admitted, but I'm not sure there was testimony on all of it. So, what I'm doing is basically buying, they call it taking it under advisement. Some people say taking it under avoidance, but actually I need to lay everything out and see what was pleaded and what testimony supported those pleadings and um you know what the prenup actually says because I didn't see all of it. So um that would go into my um decision
>> on fair and equitable uh division of the marital estate. Right.
>> And um based on the testimony whether the you know the house was separate and what what's the deal with the LLC and the Jeep and all that.
>> There we go. There we go. She has to look over the prenup and make sure that she's taking it into strong consideration. It is over. Hey guys, as always, I appreciate you for checking out yet another episode of Coffee Pod to my currently engaged or soon to be married men. If you need a prenup and would like a guide that shows you how to get a solid and legally binding prenupture agreement, hit the link into the top of the comment section and access your guide at fathershave.com Today.