Deborah Schoeneman: Bert Fields On the McCourt Divorce

snippets:
HP: Who was the unimpeachable witness?
BF: I'm not allowed to disclose that, but it's a very, very reputable estate planning lawyer with a major firm on the West Side of LA Before the divorce, she said to the wife, "you know you signed something that gives him virtually all the property involved with the Dodgers," and the wife said no. Frank said that was not intended.
So if it was not intended, that begs the question: Was the asset-transfer agreement actually modified such that the estate planning lawyer's understanding of the document as it relates to Jamie is no longer, "you know you signed something that gives him virtually all the property involved with the Dodgers."

HP: How does the divorce of Padres owners Becky and John Moores compare to the McCourts?
BF: There was not enough money for one to buy the other one out so they had to sell the Padres. Jamie has the ability to raise the money to buy out Frank, but he's refusing to sell his 50 percent. He claims he's the owner of 100 percent of the team.
Wait, if even John Moores, a billionaire computer software magnate, couldn't buy his wife out, what makes anybody believe that Jamie has the ability to buy out Frank's share and keep the team, assuming the same 50/50 split occurs?

HP: Do you think they will settle or go to court?
BF: Jamie doesn't want to settle unless she gets 50 percent of the Dodgers. I would guess that they won't settle, which is a shame. We have intelligent people on both sides saying they should settle. Our view is that as a matter of fairness, he shouldn't be asking for 100 percent of the Dodgers and all but some houses.