Frank McCourt says yes to proposed settlement, but Jamie McCourt says no

Frank McCourt accepted a mediator's proposal to settle the Dodgers' divorce case Tuesday, but Jamie McCourt rejected the proposal. The mediator, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter Lichtman, declared the two sides at impasse, court spokeswoman Mary Hearn said.

The McCourts now will await the ruling of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Scott Gordon, who will decide the validity of a marital agreement that would provide Frank with sole ownership of the Dodgers. Jamie has asked Gordon to throw out that agreement, which could leave the ownership of the team in dispute for several years. Gordon has until Dec. 28 to rule.

Lichtman ordered the McCourts not to discuss the particulars of the settlement proposal. Marc Seltzer, an attorney for Frank, issued a statement confirming his client's decision to accept the proposal.

"Frank fully supported the mediation process in the hopes that it would result in an agreement that would bring long-awaited closure to this matter," Seltzer said.

 

"It is clear that Judge Lichtman, who acted as the settlement judge in this matter, went to great lengths to bring the parties together.  He presented a thoughtful, detailed proposal that clearly took significant time, energy and expertise to prepare.

 

"After considerable deliberation, Frank accepted Judge Lichtman's proposal.  He felt it was the responsible thing to do for his family, the Dodgers organization and the entire community. Unfortunately, Judge Lichtman has declared the parties to be at impasse.  We can only conclude that Jamie rejected Judge Lichtman’s settlement proposal and is allowing this matter to drag on further."

 

Dennis Wasser, an attorney for Jamie, said he believed that Lichtman's confidentiality order prevented him even from confirming that Jamie had rejected the proposal.

 

"We believe that we are not at liberty to discuss the settlement process or the settlement proposals," Wasser said.

 

-- Bill Shaikin

 

Comments

[vtadave]

Giants fans thank you Jamie.

Us Dodgers fans think less of you than a pile of dirt.

[16blows]

Take him to the cleaners Jaime. We dudger fans are behind you all the way! (seeing as we are forced to choose between the lesser two evils.)

[D.GALLO]

Gold digging beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech!

[derek]

anything that doesn't make it a financial necessity for the McCourts to sell the team is a disservice to dodger fans.

[derek]

anything that doesn't make it a financial necessity for the McCourts to sell the team is a disservice to dodger fans.

[NY Times Reader]

For the hope of the Dodgers and the city, I hope the judge declares the team to be community property forcing it to be sold.

[JIGS]

Derek nailed it. Whatever forces them to sell... way to go Jamie!!

[jim]

Thank you, Jamie. Let's get this team sold and bring in new owners who won't use the team and the associated property like a glorified ATM machine.

[Jon]

Way to go Jamie?

Just wait til you get divorced or go through an ugly breakup.

Never get married, its a contract to give up your assets so she can go to bed and live warm and comfy with the new BF.

[Dr. Phil]

I bet this wasn't the first time Jaime said no to Frank.

[Brian]

Why is a Dodger fan mad at Jamie McCourt. You must know that proposal would let Frank McCourt keep the team. You should want him to be forced to sell so you can get an owner who can actually afford to own the Dodgers. That means a billionaire, not a millionaire in over his head.

[hf2hvit]

The sanctity of heterosexual marriage

[Jesse Zamarripa]

hopefully this will help force the eventual sale of the dodgers and we can finally rid ourselves of these bostonian crooks

[Jesse Zamarripa]

and take broxton with you

[Gangstaslapped]

I blame the omalleys, man it's gonna be a looooong painful season watching friggin c Blake at 3b,killin me-bring back the penguin!

[Mark]

What a grose, greedy and self indulgent couple. They are the poster children for what has gone wrong in this country....