Beverly Hills, CA

Wednesday, December 07, 2011

ABC News reported that "Kourtney and Kim Take N.Y., While Kris Humphries Takes Kim to Court". Why given a 72 day marriage would Kris Humphries not just go along with the divorce and end his and Kim's very short union? It has been reported that the parties have a prenuptial agreement and it is widely known that Kim Kardashian has made millions of dollars from promoting her wedding with Kris Humphries and including their dating relationship on her show with her family.

In a divorce case all a party needs to show is that there are "irreconcilable differences". In fact, if the parties are all in agreement with financial terms and other issues relating to their marriage, they can send down documents to the Court and have their divorce entered without personally appearing before the court. The documents the parties file confirm that there is no saving the marriage and the parties are in agreement with that. On the other hand, if a party seeks an annulment it must be related to one of the following specific grounds: incestuous marriage, bigamous marriage, petitioner's age at time of marriage, prior existing marriage, unsound mind, fraud, force or physical incapacity. In addition, there is a hearing where the Court takes testimony from the parties and witnesses and decides if the evidence is sufficient to warrant annulment.

Kris Humphries is claiming that Kim Kardashian committed "fraud" in her marriage to him. The false representations or concealment constituting the fraud must relate to a matter of substance and directly affect the purpose of party deceived in entering the marriage. Handley v. Handley (1960) 179 CA2d 742. For example, a spouse's intent to ignore his obligation of fidelity may support a finding of fraud. This example would be further demonstrated by this fact pattern: Husband knows that wife had a former male sexual partner prior to their marriage and asked had that relationship ended, intending that he would only marry her if it had ended and she stated yes it had ended, when in fact the relationship never ended and she intended to continue with that relationship while married. This is a fact pattern where "fraud" was committed due to the fact that it goes to the very heart of the marital relationship.

One would presume that Kris Humphries intends to show the Court that Kim Kardashian never intended to stay married to him and that she only wanted the marriage for the publicity, monies that the marriage generated and her show and that she intended from the very beginning to end the marriage at the first opportunity. Undoubtedly, Kris Humphries will have to subpoena documents from Kim Kardashian's show including any contracts and script plots and film to assist him in making his case. If "fraud" can be proven, Kris Humphries will likely attempt to overturn their prenuptial agreement and to make other claims arising out of their relationship for which Kim Kardashian profited and he did not.

For more from Sussman and Associates, visit:

www.SussmanLawFirm.com

www.Twitter.com/SussmanLawFirm

www.Facebook.com/SussmanLawFirm

www.Linkedin.com/in/EvanSussman

Media Inquiries:

Carla Lopez

Carla@Lopez-Marketing.com

323) 620-4237

Evan T. Sussman

Sussman & Associates

Beverly Hills, CA

310-288-1990