Ott's former employee, caregiver seeks common-law marriage ruling
Getting a court to determine that there was a "non-solemnized marriage,"
i.e., a common law marriage, is difficult under the best of circumstances.
It's going to be particularly difficult in the circumstance where one of
the parties to the alleged marriage is now deceased.
I'm still trying to wrap my head around the irony of Ott's EX-wife
representing Ott's family against his purported common law wife.
And so the drama continues. Hollywood could not have written a better script
with so many twists and turns.
This seems to be an easy one to settle. Check their tax returns in years past
to see if when they filed they claimed "Married filing Jointly" or
Married filing separately. Anything else would say they weren't married.
It seems one party has no shame in its claim on Mr Ott’s estate. It was
reported that Mr Ott’s house was under foreclosure proceedings while his
so-called friend and partner claimed she was caring for him. If this is the
condition of her care, her inability to keep Mr Ott’s mortgage current is
an indication of the level of care he received. How can one claim there was
consent involved when one partner was suffering dementia. Isn’t it a crime
when a person takes advantage of someone who is helpless? Sim Gill needs to get
moving on this case.
It's hard to imagine the type of person that can make a claim like this
with a straight face. Then again the power of rationalization seems to approach
the infinite. I feel for the deceased man's real family who must be in
shock that this can be taken seriously.
"Sanone has also filed a petition to recognize her relationship with Ott as
a common-law marriage...."==============This news
immediately brought to mind the indignant words of Joseph N. Welch to Senator
Joseph McCarthy during the infamous Communist activities hearings of the mid
50's, "At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
Could’ve seen this coming a mile away.
Doubt the Mr Ott would have been able to give his consent to marriage since he
wasn't in his right mind.
To be a common law wife you have to be living with the guy. And Ott was living
with Sanone-- no one disputes that. But that means he wasn't residing in
Salt Lake, which puts him as not legally able to work at the job he was elected
to. Sanone obviously ended up with Ott's salary. If so, she
should be sued by the county for the return of all of the money, because Ott
received it while he was not legally able to collect it. He was
also not working at his job, but that's another issue.
Sanone is going to drive the estate in the lawyers hands. Mr Ott probably
didn’t have the capacity to make many decisions during his relationship
with Mr. Ott. She is now making sure that the family doesn't retain his
possessions if she can’t have them.If she had his interest at
heart, she would have ensured his bills were paid, and if he lacked the capacity
to pay his own bills, he probably didn’t have the capacity to enter into a
marriage.Sanone is proving that she continues to be self serving as
well as vindictive.
Why isn't Sanone facing fraud and elder abuse charges? The County let her
get away with all kind of malfeasance while Ott was in office. Now, she's
trying to steal his estate instead of defending herself in court?