Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Options
Comments
Yes that is correct. That’s what I’m referring too and have seen it happen
I have as well and it still usually ends up having to be litigated. Keeping him out of the family just prevents the hassle
No the book was actually enjoyable.
But if he’s adopted, that means he’s family and should have all the rights of a family member. And if he’s not in the family maybe they can pay him back the money they got for taking him in. They can still grift off of suckers who believe their side of the story and will be just fine.
You did dodge one. I asked you to provide proof of a quote by any poster here....still waiting.
One more thing that can easily be proven....
"The evidence – documented in profit participation checks and studio accounting statements – is clear: over the years, the Tuohys have given Mr. Oher an equal cut of every penny received from The Blind Side. Even recently, when Mr. Oher started to threaten them about what he would do unless they paid him an eight-figure windfall, and, as part of that shakedown effort refused to cash the small profit checks from the Tuohys, they still deposited Mr. Oher's equal share into a trust account they set up for his son."
I can't find any story or reference to this, either for the screenplay or the script. Where did you read it?
If the Tuohy's are/were opportunistic, then they taught Oher something. He's currently on a promo tour for his new book. The timing for all this publicity couldn't be more beneficial. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that....it is however, worth noting.
But at least he got unlimited Taco Bell, which is nice.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist injecting some levity into the drama of people insulting people they don't know over their interpretations of 2nd hand reports on the lives of other people neither of them knows 🤣 )
Alas, it may not stop even when the season arrives. Just different topics, perhaps.
WTH!? First, I barely even come around anymore. Second, I literally came here to say I'm not forming any opinion on this story yet. Yale was the one that went all rabid because people don't buy into the narrative right away.
They have to be specifically written into it first...
Warms my heart to see a heated back and forth and it had nothing to do with me.
Anybody wanna talk about Jake Fromm?????
should I caution beware of what you wish for? Nah.
Very interesting if accurate. All they have to do is show the receipts of splitting all the proceeds equally. Like I said earlier, I think Mike is going to look really bad when this is all done.
I'm still wondering why at age 36 and years and long after his playing days are over is he suing? How does he not know his legal status with his family? Dude was a millionaire with access to the best lawyers available and a personal agent. How did he hire an agent and sign an NFL contract and have any endorsement deals if he was in a conservatorship, which puts the Tuohy's in total control of his finances legally.
The whole thing is weird. I wonder what Mike's financial situation is right now.
So ,maybe we now have a DawgNation forum replacement for @BillyDawg1 , or maybe @WCDawg (which I thought those two were the exact same guy, with different names!) and there have been a few others over the years also.
No, they do not. Children have to be disinherited otherwise they are considered a forgotten child and still have claims to the inheritance.
If you read the story, he did what you said and hired lawyers after he retired from the NFL to look into it.
Not really sure what you're talking about
It's like oleo vs butter - nothing is quite as good as the "real" thing.
You have to identify your children, otherwise anyone can claim to be someone's long-lost illegitimate child after they die. Children do not have automatic claim in a will. It would only apply if a person writes a will and identifies current children to receive split proceeds (equal disbursement or whatever % outlined in the will), then later has another child but the person dies before revising the will (I think that's what you mean by forgotten child). Most states allow for a provision that assumes the deceased wanted everything distributed equally to all children and just didn't update the will, thus the new child gets a cut. But in this case, Mr. Touhy is still alive. We don't know what's in his will or Trust. But in fact I think I read that the Touhy's set up a trust for Mike. So, not really sure what the issue is.
If you want to disinherit a child, you have to specifically lay that out in a will. The anyone can claim to be a long lost child thing is just a bizarre situation to be worried about. Forgotten child just applies to children that aren't mentioned in the will. The court is almost always going to assume they were unintentionally left out if they aren't specifically disinherited in the will. Tuohys claimed (only after they hired a lawyer and spent a day lying their asses off) that they set up a trust for Oher's son. They didn't want to adopt Oher because they didn't want him in the family and deal with the legal ramifications of that for their estate.
Dunning Kruger effect at play here? Asking for a friend.
Yes, @pgjackson does not know what he is talking about