- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LA Supreme Court rules that Ed Orgeron's ex-wife deserves $8 million from LSU buyout
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:47 pm to WaterLink
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:47 pm to WaterLink
quote:
Then it seemed like very abruptly in the offseason they're divorced and photos of him naked in bed with that blonde start circulating. I've heard some people say Kelly started doing drugs or something but not sure how true that is. I just remember it being very sudden and weird after all the stories posted about their marriage during the 2019 season, guess it wasn't as strong as we were led to believe.
He got a whiff of success and peaced out on any and all obligations, professional, personal or otherwise.
0
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:47 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Alimony isn’t taxable anymore
holy shite!!! that's the La law?
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:47 pm to clamdip
quote:
Maybe their marriage was a sham in 2019, but she was definitely in the picture then. As in, in my TV screen and on the field snuggling up to him after big wins.
You talking about 2019 or when he was fired?
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:49 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
holy shite!!! that's the La law?
That’s the federal law. That changed in a tax bill that passed ~2019. For divorce decrees entered after that, recipients don’t pay federal income taxes on alimony. For decrees entered before that date they do
This post was edited on 6/27/25 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:50 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
Don’t care, had strange.
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:51 pm to lsufball19
quote:
That’s the federal law.
damn! when was that enacted? truly creates a "ward of the state," gives alimony recipient "usually the woman," zero incentive to get off the dole(or her arse)
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:51 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
damn! when was that enacted?
5 or 6 years ago
quote:
truly creates a "ward of the state," gives alimony recipient "usually the woman," zero incentive to get off the dole(or her arse)
Eh, the husband paying alimony could write it off before the tax code changed too. In practice, alimony awards generally have just gotten lower for most people and are based on net earnings now instead of gross earnings
This post was edited on 6/27/25 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:53 pm to lsufball19
quote:
5 or 6 years ago
un-fricking-believable, I couldn't give two shits about O but that baw is totally ruined financially
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:54 pm to lsufball19
quote:
the husband paying alimony could write it off before the tax code changed too
that was most certainly not the case when I got divorced
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:55 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
so basically he will be DL coach somewhere in 2026
Hey, he will put his suit on and show everyone his magic playbook! They may be so impressed they will make him head coach again somewhere!
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:58 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
when it comes to family court the judges almost unilaterally side with the woman, and the bigger the deadbeat she is, the better the ruling
Depends on where you are. In my county we have 4 domestic court judges. You don’t want to be a woman seeking alimony in my county. Two of our judges are women and are the most husband/father friendly judges on the bench. One judge has been divorced and hates alimony. The last judge is a man from multi-generation two working parent households so he too doesn’t like alimony. And our court of appeals (TN) frowns upon permanent alimony awards
This post was edited on 6/27/25 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:59 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
$8 Million in that picture. Hope the gold digger was worth it.
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:59 pm to SUB
Great song BTW
Posted on 6/27/25 at 2:59 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Depends on where you are. In my county we have 4 domestic court judges. You don’t want to be a woman seeking alimony in my county. Two of our judges are women and are the most husband/father friendly judges on the bench. One judge has been divorced and hates alimony. The last judge is a man from multi-generation two working parent households so he too doesn’t like alimony
too bad you can't pick your venue
Posted on 6/27/25 at 3:02 pm to mpwilging
This was the appeal ruling ! State civil issues- no more appeals .
Posted on 6/27/25 at 3:05 pm to PUB
Ed is 63, presumably has millions in the bank...and probably grew the nest egg considerably over the last three years if he invested wisely.
He will be ok...
He will be ok...
Posted on 6/27/25 at 3:06 pm to Chicken
quote:
presumably has millions in the bank.
highly doubt that, but I don't know
quote:
probably grew the nest egg considerably over the last three years if he invested wisely.
doubt that even more, he definitely isn't the sharpest tool in the shed
Posted on 6/27/25 at 3:07 pm to SammyTiger
I should brush up on this point because I practice divorces, but (without reading the article), the reasoning is likely that the contract and its terms were earned during the marriage, not unlike a retirement policy that does not actually pay until retirement (though that is subject to percentages of how much was earned during the marriage).
Posted on 6/27/25 at 3:07 pm to PP7 for heisman
I’d say that worked out for LSU. Thank you for backstabbing Les, Ed.
This post was edited on 6/27/25 at 6:06 pm
Posted on 6/27/25 at 3:07 pm to mpwilging
quote:
This may get appealed
Who would they appeal to? Is there a higher court in the state than the Supreme Court?
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News