Edited Perhaps I will post the entire letter someday. Marie responded ex parte to my counsel that Ray was an honorable man, leader of the year, ex military and a fine family man and with a veiled threat. My attorney talked to some of her friends from the police department.
April 26, 2013
Beth S
Suite 750
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
re: Marie Hanna
Dear Ms. S
June 5, 2012, is a very important date to Mr. H, indeed. And it is the date to
which Marie Hanna has agreed is the valuation date for assets and debts in the division
of property in this divorce.
June 5, 2012, is the date on which Marie Hanna abandoned her 26 year
marriage without warning or prior notice; and the date that she notified David by
email that she considered their marriage over and had removed his son from his home
of 15 years. What she told their son, Thomas, to persuade him to also abandon and
reject his father, all without warning, is not known.
As Ms. Hanna knows, prior to that time, she had repeatedly assured David
that she was not leaving their marriage, that she was not having a sexual affair
with anyone, and indeed acted in all ways as though she was still devoted to, remaining in and
improving her marriage with David .
Ms. Hanna's leaving as she did, without notice, and with only an email as
information to Mr. H, has caused and continues to cause him emotional pain and
distress. She had a special telephone just for her calls to Ray Lambert; when she left it
clearly where Mr. H could find it, and he realized it contained over 54 hours of
telephone calls to Ray Lambert, complete with photos of her, of course Mr. H suffered significant distress.
Finding out during discovery that Marie Hanna has been planning this
abandonment and co-opting of their son for many months, including extensive legal
consultation with you, Ms. Silverman, has caused Mr. H to look at Ms. Hanna in
an entirely different light.
Her request that the Court order him to pay her spousal support to supplement
her relationship with Ray Lambert was especially brazen.
Mr. H knows that Marie Hanna has purchased furniture for Ray Lambert
and that she has been house hunting with him, all during the time that she was assuring
David that they were well and truly married to one another.
Her choosing to take very little in the way of household furniture and furnishings
is another indicator that she has hidden significant quantities of cash and investments
which she intends to spend after the Divorce Decree is entered.
While Mr. H has no difficulty providing the information requested in your unnumbered
paragraph 6, and of course expects the same detail and documentation from
Marie H, as well as the information requested above about her employer
contribution, Mr. H also expects complete documentation of each and every dollar
she has spent with and on Ray Lambert, the amount, the date, the purpose, as well as
details about her expenditures of her income since January 1, 2011, and the
expenditures of the business expense reimbursement which she withheld from the joint
account in 2012, and money spent for attorney's fees in 2010, 2011 and 2012.
It is amusing that Marie Hanna wants "peace of mind about accepting the June 5
date", which she already has, of course, when it is her duplicitous and deceptive
behavior which has led to total distrust of her actions and decisions by Mr. H
It is further amusing that Marie Hanna admits in your letter that she has spent
"marital funds used by her that went to purchase gifts for any other person". Of course
he won't stipulate to anything of the sort until he has complete documentation of these
gifts, the date, the amount of funds spent, the recipients and the purpose of each of
these gifts, and the current physical location of these gifts.
your unnumbered paragraph 9:
Of course, as we state earlier in this letter, David could not possibly waive
martial claim to amounts of money for gifts to othes since he knows nothing of what
gifts Marie Hanna has so generously bestowed. He won't stipulate to anything of the
sort until he has complete documentation of these gifts, the date, the amount of funds
spent, the recipients, the purpose of each of these gifts, and the current physical
location of each.
And while she is making her affidavit for gifts, Mr. H wants her affidavit to
include what she spent her business expense money for - see Stipulation 3 - he cannot
agree to waive it if he does not know what it was spent for.
None of these choices concerning her sons speaks well of Marie Hanna as a
professional educator, not to speak of as a mother and wife. So, no, David H is
not going to participate in Marie Hanna's further schemes.
I have supported Mr. numerous attempts to work out reasonable
resolutions and action steps for the remaining issues. Mr. thought that and Ms.
Hanna had resolved issues and had established an efficient framework in which to
resolve the remaining issues that have not been settled. He has come to the
conclusion, however, that Ms. Hanna prefers to play games - agreeing in one
conversation and email and then changing her mind within 24-36 hours on the identical
topic. She is determined, apparently, to present a constantly moving target.
He is coming the realization that a trial in June may be the best resolution of
several of these issues. Ray Lambert will be on the witness list.
After completing this letter yesterday late afternoon, the mail brought your letter
asking for a continuance of the June 27 trial date so you could take another vacation,
this time to Israel.
Mr. H and I do not agree to a continuance of the trial date and we will
oppose any attempt you make to obtain one.
Sincerely,
AL
No comments:
Post a Comment