Kandi's Wedding: Going to the Chapel and... Mama Joyce is Pissed.

[Aging Goth]

In CA it is different, people are freer and there are many more choices available than in the south.  I know it was the culture I was a part of growing up.  People say that there are no arranged marriages in America but there are and not just for Religious or cultural reasons.  My mother arranged my marriage because she felt I should marry someone who has a great job.  That lasted a few months before I excaped-er- got a legal separation.  The guy was a hard worker and had a good job and also was a big jerk.  But still there are marriages arranged by families who feel that women should be married and having children rather than seeking professional careers.  Even now days.

[mbaywife123]

I still just laugh to this day that when Mr. Mbay and I got married (we eloped)in Jamaica (me age 34 & he age 39) that our status was listed as follows: Me as a spinster and him as a bachelor.

[ribboninthesky1]

I live in the south and I don't go around telling women to get married. I think it does happen but do not think it is a quirk of the southern states. 

 

I believe it is as much a small town thing (which most of the US is comprised of) as it is a southern thing.  I wouldn't be surprised if similar social pressure occurs in small towns of New York, California, Minnesota, or Washington.  Especially since having children is the next major (expected) step after marriage.  If marriage was just about two people coming together in commitment, then adults could do that at any age.  But it's not - it's about children as well.  Didn't Kandi mention wanting to have another child? 

[FozzyBear]

I believe it is as much a small town thing (which most of the US is comprised of) as it is a southern thing. I wouldn't be surprised if similar social pressure occurs in small towns of New York, California, Minnesota, or Washington. Especially since having children is the next major (expected) step after marriage. If marriage was just about two people coming together in commitment, then adults could do that at any age. But it's not - it's about children as well. Didn't Kandi mention wanting to have another child?

You know you're right. I grew up in a city in CA, but often when I talk to women from the surrounding small towns they talk about how everybody they know was married by 22 or 23. I guess maybe it's easier to ignore this in CA since CA is comprised of so many big cities. I mean a smallish city in CA has 100,000 people and I would consider any place with a population of less than that to be a small town. Under 50,000 is tiny! I know in the south there are fewer big cites and many more small towns.

[Lola16]

But the successful, "well-known" black women who DO get married at late 30s-40ish don't seem to be having much luck post-altar.  See:  Shepherd, Sherri;  Jones, Star; Parks, Phaedra; McMillan, Terri ….  

 

Maybe they're better off just having permanent "fiancés" like Jennifer Hudson, Oprah and Jennifer Aniston.

Or boyfriends like Kenya's who wants no part of appearing on reality TV.

Talk about someone wanting a come -up --- that's definitely Big Al (or whatever Sherri's soon to be ex calls himself).  User guy with a girlfriends; user guy who is gay; dumbass felon; gay (not sure if he's a user or loser)

 

Well maybe Kandi would be better off with a George Glass Kenya style since she has her toys but she might want an actual real person.

[RealityGal]

There are different ways to approach pre-nups.  You can have the kind where the wealthier spouse gives something to the non-moneyed spouse in case of a breakup, but the non-moneyed spouse waives some of the legal protections that would otherwise be available.  Or you can have the scorched-earth kind of pre-nup, where the non-moneyed spouse waives everything, as was done here.  But Kandi was acting as if prenup had only one definition:  the scorched-earth kind.

 

Kandi was cold!  She wanted to leave Todd with nothing, and she was mad that he was even trying to negotiate some side issues, such as having to get out in 30 days.  I feel bad for Todd.  He had been saying that he didn't want her money, so that resulted in her attorney drafting a prenup that truly gave him zilch.  Meanspirited. 

 

I think he didn't realize what was up until he saw it in black and white, but then it was too late to negotiate.  He was stuck with his previous statements.  On WWHL he looked like he was still feeling the sting, when he said that it felt like business.

 

I wonder if those types of pre-nups can be voided by a judge because they seem to be unconscionable, and there is no consideration for the party who gets nothing.  I assume a pre-nup, at its heart is a contract, but a contract requires consideration by both parties.  An agreement that basically says "you marry me and get nothing if we divorce" doesn't seem like much consideration for Todd.

[PrincessTT]

I wonder if those types of pre-nups can be voided by a judge because they seem to be unconscionable, and there is no consideration for the party who gets nothing.  I assume a pre-nup, at its heart is a contract, but a contract requires consideration by both parties.  An agreement that basically says "you marry me and get nothing if we divorce" doesn't seem like much consideration for Todd.

 

I'm not sure if this is the same in other places but if they were over here I would think that Kandi & Todd's pre-nup would be easy for Todd to have voided if the were to divorce. 

 

If we rush into a prenuptial agreement just before we get married will it still be enforceable?

It is not a good idea to rush into a prenuptial agreement and, generally speaking, you should sign up some weeks before the date of the actual wedding ceremony. If not, corners tend to get cut and there will be an increased risk that the legal validity of your prenuptial agreement can be challenged later. Also, if you rush into a prenuptial agreement UK courts tend to be open to an argument that one party was under a degree of duress and this can also mean your prenuptial agreement will not be enforced by a UK court. 

 

A pre-nup signed a few hours before the wedding with all that footage of them arguing about it the night before he signed, I don't think it would be a struggle for Todd to challenge it. 

 

It might be different where Kandi & Todd are though.

[NannyPants]

California, too. A prenup signed just hours prior to a wedding, especially one of this magnitude and import (to the program's sponsors) is pretty easy to challenge. There's even a Family Code Section which deals with presumptions of validity, including time frames for execution of the document. I would be surprised if Georgia doesn't have something similar, but don't know.

[EtheltoTillie]

Agreed.  I thought it was interesting that Kandi's lawyer made sure to videotape everything for the purpose of preserving the evidence that the final signing was not coerced (and of course Bravo was filming too).  But the videotapes showed a beaten man.  So . . . possible to overturn, should it come to that?  Maybe.

[RealityGal]

Agreed.  I thought it was interesting that Kandi's lawyer made sure to videotape everything for the purpose of preserving the evidence that the final signing was not coerced (and of course Bravo was filming too).  But the videotapes showed a beaten man.  So . . . possible to overturn, should it come to that?  Maybe.

 

I wonder if its why Todd let the terms be so one sided.  In most contracts there has to be some consideration, or both parties have to give something of value in exchange for there to be a valid contract.  But if one person gets everything and another person gets nothing there is no consideration.  Maybe he is already thinking of a potential out.

[cooksdelight]

Imagine the pressure Todd was under. Cameras were rolling 24/7, the show must go on, etc. I think he really, really loves her but it's obvious who wears the pants in that family.

[SpringTulips]

I think if Todd felt under pressure to sign the prenup that was his fault.  It seems he and Kandi had both agreed to having a prenup.  He had time to hire his own lawyer to draft a document to start negotiations.  He left it to Kandi to start the drafting with her lawyer and then did not hire his own lawyer to the last minute. 

[RealityGal]

I think if Todd felt under pressure to sign the prenup that was his fault.  It seems he and Kandi had both agreed to having a prenup.  He had time to hire his own lawyer to draft a document to start negotiations.  He left it to Kandi to start the drafting with her lawyer and then did not hire his own lawyer to the last minute. 

 

 

Imagine the pressure Todd was under. Cameras were rolling 24/7, the show must go on, etc. I think he really, really loves her but it's obvious who wears the pants in that family.

 

But I think it all my feed into an argument ultimately to void the pre-nup because there was no consideration.  It was all done too fast, he didn't really have any bargaining power, he didn't even have an attorney (even if it was his own fault), and ultimately, he got no consideration.  Courts generally don't protect people from making bad deals, but sometimes if they are so one sided they will find that there was no consideration, or that the terms are unconscionable.  And I wonder if that wasn't part of Todd's plan.  He doesn't want to come off looking like a golddigger, so just set up a situation where it will be possible to fight the validity of the pre-nup if they ever split up.  

[SpringTulips]

But I think it all my feed into an argument ultimately to void the pre-nup because there was no consideration

 

 

I think under prenup law the marriage itself is the consideration offered....no other consideration need be given.  There is the issue of whether the prenup is unconscionable.  But I don't think it is necessarily unconscionable if both spouses agree to keep the property that they came into the marriage with.  It may seem one-sided in the case that one side has larger assets prior to marriage, but not unconscionable.  The prenup of itself would not leave Todd destitute should the marriage end.

[RealityGal]

I think under prenup law the marriage itself is the consideration offered....no other consideration need be given.  There is the issue of whether the prenup is unconscionable.  But I don't think it is necessarily unconscionable if both spouses agree to keep the property that they came into the marriage with.  It may seem one-sided in the case that one side has larger assets prior to marriage, but not unconscionable.  The prenup of itself would not leave Todd destitute should the marriage end.

 

But I would think that the consideration, if it was the same for both parties would be a reasonable contract.  But now you're saying that to have an equal bargain, one person's promise to become a spouse is worth the other person's promise to become a spouse + forfeiture to their rights of millions in assets.  And while the law doesn't promise people an equal bargain, and it doesn't keep people from making a bad deal, where the deal is so bad, I think courts have found lack of consideration, or unconscionability.  I believe this is why most pre-nup's generally offer the spouse something (ie - $200,000 if you divorce, in exchange for not trying to come after my assets)  I think it might be unconscionable with some of the terms (get out of the house in 30 days) and if certain terms are unconscionable, the court's question I believe would be whether or not they could keep the spirit of the agreement by razing out the unconscionable terms.  If there are too many unconscionable terms the court, I believe would be more likely to simply void it out.  I don't know that the court is so concerned with someone being destitute, because broke people divorce all the time, I would think the court would be more concerned with whether or not both parties were given consideration for what they gave up.  The are both osetensibly getting a "life partner" in the deal, but one of them is getting a life partner and the ability to dodge any laws Georgia has for the split of assets after a divorce...to the tune of millions of dollars.  That bargain may be so unequal that its seen as there being a lack of consideration, or the terms being so unconscionable as to render it voidable.

[EtheltoTillie]

Realitygal, I wanted to post something earlier, and someone else beat me to it.  I'm  not a Georgia lawyer ,and I'm not a matrimonial lawyer.  I had to study some of the New York version of this to pass the New York bar..  But I think what someone said earlier about the marriage itself being the consideration is the correct view in most states.  You are permitted to waive all rights to support.  However, you usually can't waive the right to support if you would become a public charge. 

 

Here, Todd's lawyer did not tell him that the contract was unconscionable and would not be enforceable.  He just told him that he didn't think Todd should sign it without negotiating some more favorable terms.  Once those negotiations started, things got really ugly, and it seems like they ended up with the same original prenup with maybe a few changes. 

[RealityGal]

Realitygal, I wanted to post something earlier, and someone else beat me to it.  I'm  not a Georgia lawyer ,and I'm not a matrimonial lawyer.  I had to study some of the New York version of this to pass the New York bar..  But I think what someone said earlier about the marriage itself being the consideration is the correct view in most states.  You are permitted to waive all rights to support.  However, you usually can't waive the right to support if you would become a public charge. 

 

Here, Todd's lawyer did not tell him that the contract was unconscionable and would not be enforceable.  He just told him that he didn't think Todd should sign it without negotiating some more favorable terms.  Once those negotiations started, things got really ugly, and it seems like they ended up with the same original prenup with maybe a few changes. 

 

I'm certainly not a family law attorney, so that makes sense, although I would think unconscionable terms would be something that would be determined by a judge if Todd were to later fight the pre-nup.  I had thought unconscionability was a contract defense against enforcement of the terms.

[WimminWinning]

I think if Todd felt under pressure to sign the prenup that was his fault.  It seems he and Kandi had both agreed to having a prenup.  He had time to hire his own lawyer to draft a document to start negotiations.  He left it to Kandi to start the drafting with her lawyer and then did not hire his own lawyer to the last minute. 

 

This all day! Every chance he got, he used his talking heads to say how late and rushed everything was. There are 2 people in this engagement and he had just as much responsibility to draft a prenup as Kandi to protect his own assets/interests.

 

But I think it all my feed into an argument ultimately to void the pre-nup because there was no consideration.  It was all done too fast, he didn't really have any bargaining power, he didn't even have an attorney (even if it was his own fault), and ultimately, he got no consideration.  Courts generally don't protect people from making bad deals, but sometimes if they are so one sided they will find that there was no consideration, or that the terms are unconscionable.  And I wonder if that wasn't part of Todd's plan.  He doesn't want to come off looking like a golddigger, so just set up a situation where it will be possible to fight the validity of the pre-nup if they ever split up.  

 

I said from the beginning that Todd looks like he's setting Kandi up. He created an entire narrative of how he is supposedly a spouse who gave up a promising career (or at least career opportunities) to fully support a wealthy spouse that waits until the last minute to give him a prenup that says he gets nothing. He worked that narrative overtime - and him having to deal with MJ bathed him in a sympathetic light making people want to root for him in everything related to the engagement/marriage. As many times as he told that narrative in his talking heads (which was numerous times!) he always conveniently forgot to mention that he got 50% of the profits from the joint projects with Kandi and that negotiations weren't as Todd (and BRAVO) portrayed them in that (1) negotiations weren't last minute, the couple had been verbally negotiating for months (at least since around the time of the "to which I'm accustomed" argument with MJ, which started because Kandi was talking to MJ about what she was negotiating with Todd), so the only late-hour negotiating that was new to the table was the 30-day moveout, and (2) he was part of holding things up by not hiring a lawyer like Kandi asked (months ago!) to co-draft the prenup with her lawyer. If Todd tries to fight this prenup in the unfortunate event of their divorce, Kandi has a really strong argument that Todd was not shafted because the written prenup was almost exactly what they verbally agreed over months of discussions and he can't claim that she coerced him to sign the written version by presenting it late because he is also responsible for the lateness.

[qtpye]

When I saw the show, the pre-nup seemed very one sided. I do not think Kandi needs to be loose with her money, but dang if it seemed like she did not care about him at all.

 

However, I think what Kandi plans is to make Todd a major part of her production company and he will benefit by the marriage by being able to bank on her connections and resources.  Todd will still take an independent assignment here or there, but will probably eventually start working full time for Kandi's multiple businesses in some capacity.

 

I have seen this happen many times when a much wealthier spouse has somewhat of an empire.  Russell and Kimora Lee Simmons marriage comes to mind (they are divorced now).  She was able to start her Baby Phat line of his Phat Farm brand( I think...do not remember clearly, because it seems like a long time ago).

 

I am not saying that Kandi is Russell Simmons or she is obligated to help Todd with his career, but if they do get divorced, he could still probably walk away in an overall better financial position then what he was before the marriage.

 

Some people will have problems with this (Joyce) because they believe a man should provide independently of his wife.