Ownership - Drawing the Line

A friend of mine recently got married, and shortly after the marriage, he started up a small company (DJ company, if you're interested). Now to my knowledge, his wife has been giving him a hard time, because since they are married, they have shared assets and such, and wants to have her name written in as a company owner for whatever reason.

I don't know how it ended up resolving itself, but where would one draw the line in a relationship as far as who owns what, whether it's a company or personal bits of property. If/when I'm married, I don't really want to "own" her curling iron, per say, but then the house is pretty much shared (even if one may have paid for it or owned it before marriage).

Jam it back in, in the dark.

In the case of this item, I would refuse to put her name in the title. Does she do work for the company? No. I do the work for the company. Hence, my name is on the door. That's how it works.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Personally I'd tell me wife to drop the issue. He started the company, not her. If this is something she is willing to leave him over then all the better, just shows her true gold digging face.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

If my wife would want to get actively and productively involved in a company that I might create, then I would see no problem with signing her on. However, if she just wants her name on it for that sake, then I will have to respectfully decline her equal rights in ownership of the company.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I wonder if incorporating the DJ company would make any difference in this situation. I'm not very knowledgeable on that area of business.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Haha, this is why I'm not even getting married; not even gay-married.

Love is a funny thing. You can love the death out of someone one day, but it can deteriorate so fast and for reasons you could not foresee. At which case you get owned by all the legalities. You thought it was nice at first; you even felt obligated to do it because if you didn't that would show distrust, and then look what it gets you.

If they ain't help make it they don't help take it is my personal rule. They may borrow it if I say so, however.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Unless a prenup addresses this issue, you'll need to just suck it up and accept equal ownership of the company. Any disputes over property not addressed in the prenup are ususually split evenly when divorce time rolls around. Of course if someone stays happily married to the same person their whole life, what's there to argue about?

FELIPE NO

In this case I agree that unless she is working for the company, he shouldn't put her as an owner. Just because your married doesn't mean you get access to everything, but she should end up seeing some of the money.

Most amazing jew boots

He started the company after marriage. Frankly speaking, the wife owns half of whatever property that was acquired during the marriage. There is no need to demand for her name to be put down as one of the incorporators - she is entitled to half of his share regardless.

Most amazing jew boots

Wasn't there a Nicholas Cage movie like this. Where he buys a lottery ticket for his wife, he promises half of it to a waitress, he ends up winning but his wife takes him to court to say that the money is all hers or some shit.

I agree with Legato. Love is freaky and money does a fantastic job of getting in the way. When I get married, I want to have seperate and joint checking accounts. My money in my account, your money in your account, sharing money in shared account. I wouldn't squabble over the lawn mower being mine as well because he uses it and therefore, has a sort of claim over it but the house better damn well be in both our names. Of his company, unless I did any real work in it's upstart, I wouldn't complain having my name on it. Because really, if we are to get divorced he's fucked either way so why make a big stink over it.

Most amazing jew boots

Ya... it depends if she does work for the business. But if she doesnt... for me it would depend on the relationship status. If I thought we were doing just fine, sure why the hell not, put her name on it.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Zergrinch is correct:

Any property bought after the wedding is considered joint property. The business can be considered a joint business if the money is used for family issues. (House payments, renovations, food, and so on).

If ANY of the money used to start this business was hers--then yes, she can be listed as an owner. But, if she isn't doing any of the work--then she is a silent partner.

How do I know? I've been married.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

In this case, Diversion, your friend should've gotten one of those agreements that states what yours is yours and what's mine is mine. I forgot the name of that kind of thing. If your friend's wife doesn't help out with the company in any way, she shouldn't say shit about having her name in the company ownership.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Prenupital Agreement. Which in this case wouldn't help because the business was started after they married.

In this case, I side with the guy. I have little faith in the courts to take that viewpoint, however.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

This scenario is one of the reasons why I have very little faith in people. My (recently divorced) mother is about to go through a similar situation. My Step-father has not paid a dime on the house that they have lived in the entire time that they have lived there, yet because they were married at the time, my Mom must give him half of any profit that is made from the sale of her home.

To me, this is insane, and I would rather give the house away than to give this bastard any sort of reward for being an asshole for over a decade. Of course, that would mean that my Mother would receive nothing for her hard work as well. In the end, I would have to agree with Arainach, get a prenup. If someone does not wish to bare half the burden, they should not acquire half the reward.

FELIPE NO

hmmm. i feel in terms of ownership, it's the person who paid, and at the same time the person who uses more often should get the item.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Yeah. If one party has put far more time, effort and/or resources into something, then it should be theirs.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

This is what I'd like to call a deal-breaker. Too bad they're already married. It would be interesting to know how LONG they've been married and if an annullment is still a possibility.

Only reason why I say this is because she's up to something. When she asks questions or makes requests like that, I start wondering the motives. I would also wager that this woman has NO DJ skill whatsoever, so basically she has no right being on the papers. What I'll tell your buddy to do now is fold the business, divorce, and start back up under another name.

There's nowhere I can't reach.