MJ Paternity Suit

Saint1

Superstar
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
9,101
Reputation
1,162
Daps
26,258
Reppin
CA
He either paid that paper on the low or the chick realized what she was up against

do you read?

Jordan counter-sued, showing via his attorney that the teen’s parentage had been established in a 2003 divorce case in which Smith acknowledged that her son was the result of her now-ex-husband, Glennville G. Reynolds.
 

Goatpoacher

Superstar
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
8,464
Reputation
590
Daps
16,190
This dismissal means the following: The lady is retarded and thinks you can file a lawsuit without any supporting facts. The lawyers looked over the case and told her to fukk off before she perjured herself.

Her own lawyers basically said that her case didn't pass the Laugh Test.
 

Egomaniacal1

Director of the Federal Bureau of Instigation
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,405
Reputation
1,065
Daps
19,357
Reppin
Martin, TN
I agree that i think he does look like Jordan but is this article saying that the case was dropped because she verbally said the ex-hubby was the father in 2003?? I mean was or was there not a paternity test done in 2003? With no paternity test the kid still might be MJ's but it seems like since she clearly believed(and still believes?) the kid is the ex-husbands so she had to back down because the risk is if she's wrong about MJ being the pops that counter-sue on her ass would not be pretty.

Is that about accurate?
 

Goatpoacher

Superstar
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
8,464
Reputation
590
Daps
16,190
I agree that i think he does look like Jordan but is this article saying that the case was dropped because she verbally said the ex-hubby was the father in 2003?? I mean was or was there not a paternity test done in 2003? With no paternity test the kid still might be MJ's but it seems like since she clearly believed(and still believes?) the kid is the ex-husbands so she had to back down because the risk is if she's wrong about MJ being the pops that counter-sue on her ass would not be pretty.

Is that about accurate?

The attorney saying that the client agreed to withdraw her case for the best interest of her child at this time is a tacit admission that the case was crap to begin with. If the lawyers believed there was a 10 percent chance that MJ was the father, they would have proceeded (or recommended the client proceed).

However, they basically said the following:

1. The lady filed the lawsuit before they were retained.
2. After consultation, they all agreed to drop the suit.

That means the lawyers think she's a liar or that she would clearly come across as a liar. I don't think there is much chance of a cross-complaint. If anything, there is the potential for perjury.
 

Will Ross

Superstar
Bushed
Joined
May 5, 2012
Messages
24,714
Reputation
-6,053
Daps
59,387
Let's be real what woman is going to wait this long to get paid? Kid looked like Jordan's she fukked Jordan and wanted to get paid.
 

jwinfield

Veteran
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
44,308
Reputation
9,697
Daps
216,386
Reppin
NULL
I agree that i think he does look like Jordan but is this article saying that the case was dropped because she verbally said the ex-hubby was the father in 2003?? I mean was or was there not a paternity test done in 2003? With no paternity test the kid still might be MJ's but it seems like since she clearly believed(and still believes?) the kid is the ex-husbands so she had to back down because the risk is if she's wrong about MJ being the pops that counter-sue on her ass would not be pretty.

Is that about accurate?

Collateral estoppel says a party can't relitigate an issue if they were party to the case where the court decided on the issue.

The woman during her divorce proceedings, probably in her petition that her ex was the father. The court would take this as fact, especially if the ex didn't fight her on this, had no reason to believe the kid wasn't his. The issue had been settled by the courts.

So MJ is saying under collateral estoppel she can't have the paternity of the child litigated again
 
Top