
Divorce Lawyers Shared The Wildest Reasons Their Clients Split Up, And The Stories Are Suuuuuuper Juicy
There's no doubt in my mind that divorce lawyers probably hear some of the most bizarre details about people's marriages.
A while back, Reddit user dankph asked: "Divorce Lawyers of Reddit, what's the most outrageous reason someone filed for divorce?"
Some responses also came from this thread because they were just too good to ignore.
And the stories range from painfully petty to jaw-on-the-floor-shocking. Here are the best ones:
1. "At my last firm, we did general law, which included probate. A couple did their will with our firm. We drafted everything. They were in their mid-70s to early 80's and married for 40 years total. Divorced and remarried once. The husband wanted us to put in his will that his kids get his entire estate, but he did not want us to tell his wife. He wanted to have us make a secret will and a fake will. The fake will would be signed with her present, and then he wanted us to shred it, and he would come in later to sign the 'real will.' He accidentally copied his wife on the email that had all of this information disclosed in it. Two weeks later, he called us and said he wanted to file for divorce instead."
— PetiteChaos
2. "Because the wife spent $42,000 on psychic hotlines."
— jdoc1121
3. "His wife was a loud chewer at the dinner table. He developed a complex and literally needed out as he couldn't bear to eat with her."
— TISM_riverphoenix
4. "A couple got divorced over a cat. The wife called the cat Snowball because of its white fur and only wanted the cat to eat wet food or chicken breast. The husband called the cat Lily, again because of its white fur, and believed it should only eat dry food. These two argued for a year over custody of the cat but did not give a shit about their human kids, aged 15 months, 4 years, and 6 years old."
— sxcamaro
5. "The husband taught the parakeet certain cuss words for his wife. The bird lives with him now."
— brandonrandom9
6. "My client was the outrageous one, so my heart went out to his poor wife. He made their lives a penny-pinching hell. He was obsessed with avoiding unnecessary driving (wear and tear on the car, gas expenses), so he cut the whole family's hair at home and never let them eat at a restaurant or go to the movies. Weirdest of all: He kept one toilet paper roll on him at all times, and everyone had to get one square from him before they could go to the bathroom — he never gave more than one square. The wife finally got fed up and left him when: 1) He gave her bangs during an in-home haircut and 2) their daughter was so traumatized by the toilet paper thing they couldn't potty train her."
"Also, he HATED paying his divorce lawyer bill. He was also an old-fashioned mega-catholic who considered divorce a deadly sin. He viewed my whole job as an unnecessary (and sinful) expense."
— Julietcaravello1
7. "My dad was a divorce lawyer. He had a client who wanted to divorce her husband for two reasons: He did not have enough hair on his chest and he did not drive fast enough."
"Keep in mind this was in the '70s when chest hair was a bit more important."
— Bodhi_ZA
Max
8. "The wife was kidnapped in Mexico, and her husband refused to pay ransom. Eventually, her family managed to pay, and she was left on the side of the road."
"I don't know how much they wanted as ransom. But it was substantial as the conversation between her family and him was how he had it liquid, and they had to liquidate investments to get that amount. Her husband also wasn't with her on the trip. The wife was traveling with cousins and went downstairs alone to get ice cream and wait for them to get ready. I do not know all the details. She was extremely distraught talking about it and it was not necessary to pry. But it was clearly traumatic, and even though I had a million more questions, I left it alone."
— [deleted]
9. "I still remember an early case that I worked on where the man divorced his wife for her bingo addiction. She went to bingo 10 to 12 times per week. She was 82, he was 86."
— [deleted]
10. "The clients were two 20-somethings. They were irreconcilable because he kept smoking her weed stash when she wasn't home."
— [deleted]
11. "My boss's wife just filed for divorce because he used too much toilet paper. She was a super-thrifty coupon lady, and would even listen when he was in the bathroom to see if he was using too much."
— dizzylyingdown
12. "I was a legal assistant when this case came in, but this lady divorced her husband of two months because he got her an iPad case for her birthday instead of the expensive jewelry she wanted."
— [deleted]
13. "The husband had an argument with the new in-laws during the wedding and moved out at around 5 a.m. during the first night."
— apolloxer
14. "One that sticks out to me was when the husband and wife were both playing an online role-playing game like The Sims, except more adult. Well, the wife got very heavily involved in the game, spending 10 hours a day playing, and she wouldn't stop. The breaking point was when the husband set up a fake avatar to see what she was doing and found her avatar having sex with some random guy's avatar."
— Reddituser
15. "I worked for a law office where the owner would talk about a man who sued for divorce because his wife would no longer allow him to use a loaded gun as a... 'marital aid.' She had apparently agreed to it at some point and was fine with the gun as long as it was empty, but that just wasn't good enough for him, and he thought this was reasonable grounds for divorce."
— IRtheLaw19
16. "Because the husband insisted on bringing his mother on their honeymoon. That's where the wife discovered that the reason was because his mother was still breastfeeding him. Yes, the husband — a grown man — was still breastfeeding."
— OMGisCarolein
17. "My neighbor filed for divorce because her husband smacked his lips when he ate and slurped his coffee and soup — she thought if she didn't divorce him, she'd end up going to jail for battery."
— mollymuppet78
18. "The husband was frustrated by his wife's hoarding. She was frustrated by his utter uselessness. He filed for divorce, and she was my client. Her prized possession was a room or two full of scrapbooking materials. His prized possession was a yard full of junk cars that he never worked on. They had no children and no real assets. They hated each other more than any two people I'd ever met, and the only terms they would agree to were these: he gets the scrapbooking stuff, and she gets the cars."
"My client also took the house, as he had no income and didn't want it anyway. It was the shortest divorce decree I ever drafted. I intentionally squeezed it onto one page, and the judge and I had a good laugh over it. Once the decree was signed and filed, she hauled all the scrapbooking stuff to the yard, and he removed it to the dump. She then called a junk shop I referred her to and had all of his cars removed from the yard."
— schmerpmerp
Max
19. "A friend of mine divorced her husband because his dick was too big. She said it was fun at first, but that sex became 'too much work.'"
"When she first told me, I refused to believe it. But then she showed me a picture of them dancing at their reception, and holy shit was this guy packing heat!"
— PantiesMallone
20. "I overheard a divorcing couple in my associate's office arguing about all the reasons they disliked each other when all of a sudden the husband started screaming about the wife leaving shit stains in the toilet."
— joeredspecial
21. "The husband wanted a divorce because the wife was still wiping the ass of their perfectly healthy teenage son."
— Reddituser
22. "I once had a client who married a woman he met while he was stationed in Guantanamo Bay. Well, she was practicing cooking American dishes for him when she decided to make spaghetti and added an ingredient from an unlabeled freezer bag to the sauce. When I asked her what it was, she just replied hysterically that she didn't know any better. That's when her husband chimed in and said that the ingredient was MENSTRUAL BLOOD!"
"The wife explained to me through tears that her mother and grandmother had told her that's the way to keep her man. Her husband couldn't let it go."
— Palatron

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hollywood enters AI scraping wars with new lawsuit from Disney and NBCUniversal
Disney (DIS) and NBCUniversal sued an artificial intelligence developer for allegedly infringing on their protected works, the first Hollywood corporate titans to join a mushrooming legal war pitting copyright holders against AI upstarts training their models with data scraped from the internet. In a lawsuit filed on Wednesday in a Los Angeles Federal District Court, Disney and NBCUniversal said that AI image-creating platform Midjourney pirated images without authorization. Midjourney obtained copies of Disney's Star Wars, Minions, and other characters through unauthorized libraries containing works from two Hollywood studios, according to the complaint. Its software allows people to create images from the companies' popular fictional characters, the suit said. The companies included AI-generated images of characters ranging from Darth Vader and Buzz Lightyear to the Minions and Spider-Man. 'Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing,' Disney said in its complaint. Midjourney did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company is defending itself in another federal case in California brought by artists who allege Midjourney illegally trained its AI image generation models on their copyrighted works. The latest confrontation expands the number of high-profile cases from copyright holders seeking to guard their works from the reach of technology firms. A question at the heart of all these lawsuits: Can artificial intelligence companies use copyrighted material to train generative AI models without asking the owner of that data for permission? Another such clash came earlier this week when social media site Reddit (RDDT) sued AI startup Anthropic ( a company backed by tech giants Amazon (AMZN) and Google (GOOG, GOOGL) that created the AI language model Claude. Reddit is claiming in the new lawsuit that Anthropic intentionally scraped Reddit users' personal data without their consent and then put their data to work training Claude. Reddit said in its complaint that Anthropic "bills itself as the white knight of the AI industry" and argues that "it is anything but." Anthropic said last year that it had blocked its bots from Reddit's website, according to the complaint. But Reddit said Anthropic 'continued to hit Reddit's servers over one hundred thousand times.' An Anthropic spokesperson said, "We disagree with Reddit's claims and will defend ourselves vigorously." Anthropic is also defending itself against a separate suit from music publishers, including Universal Music Group (0VD.F), ABKCO, and Concord, alleging that Anthropic infringed on copyrights for Beyoncé, the Rolling Stones, and other artists as it trained Claude on lyrics to more than 500 songs. Courts haven't settled on a definitive answer to the question of whether artificial intelligence companies can use copyrighted material to train generative AI models without permission. However, last February, the US District Court for Delaware handed copyright holder Thomson Reuters a win in a case that could impact what data training models can legally collect. The court granted Thomson Reuters' request for summary judgment, saying that its competitor, Ross, infringed on its copyrights by using lawsuit summaries to train its AI model. The court rejected Ross's argument that it could use the summaries under the concept of fair use, which allows copyrights to be used for news reporting, teaching, research, criticism, and commentary. One big name featuring prominently in some of these clashes is OpenAI ( the creator of chatbot ChatGPT that is run by Sam Altman and backed by Microsoft (MSFT). Comedian Sarah Silverman has accused the companies in a lawsuit of copying material from her book and 7 million pirated works in order to train its AI systems. Parenting website Mumsnet has also accused OpenAI of scraping its six-billion-word database without consent. But perhaps the most prominent case targeting OpenAI is from the New York Times (NYT), which in 2023 filed a lawsuit accusing OpenAI and Microsoft of illegally using millions of the news outlet's published stories to train OpenAI's language models. The newspaper has said that ChatGPT at times generates query answers that closely mirror its original publications. Last week, OpenAI called the lawsuit "baseless" and appealed a judge's recent order in that case requiring the AI developer to preserve 'output data' generated by ChatGPT. OpenAI and Microsoft are using a defense similar to those raised in other AI training copyright disputes: that the Times' publicly available content falls under the fair use doctrine and, therefore, can be used to train its models. Getty Images is trying to chip away at that same argument in lawsuits in the US and United Kingdom filed in 2023 against AI image generation startup Stability. The UK case went to trial on Monday. Stability argues that fair use (or "fair dealing" as it's known in the UK) justified training its technology, Stable Diffusion, on copyrighted Getty material. That same defense has hallmarks of justification that Google has been asserting for the past two decades to fight lawsuits claiming it violated copyright laws when pulling information into results for users' search queries. In 2005, the Authors Guild sued Google over millions of books that the tech giant scanned and made available in 'snippets' to online searchers. Google didn't pay for the copyrighted information but did provide word-for-word pieces of the copyrighted works in search results. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reasoned in a decision that Google's scanning project tested the limits of fair use but was 'transformative' and therefore protected under fair use law. In 2016, Getty Images sued Google over similar claims, alleging that Google violated its copyrights and antitrust law by displaying Getty's high-resolution images in Google search results. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hollywood enters AI scraping wars with new lawsuit from Disney and NBCUniversal
Disney (DIS) and NBCUniversal sued an artificial intelligence developer for allegedly infringing on their protected works, the first Hollywood corporate titans to join a mushrooming legal war pitting copyright holders against AI upstarts training their models with data scraped from the internet. In a lawsuit filed on Wednesday in a Los Angeles Federal District Court, Disney and NBCUniversal said that AI image-creating platform Midjourney pirated images without authorization. Midjourney obtained copies of Disney's Star Wars, Minions, and other characters through unauthorized libraries containing works from two Hollywood studios, according to the complaint. Its software allows people to create images from the companies' popular fictional characters, the suit said. The companies included AI-generated images of characters ranging from Darth Vader and Buzz Lightyear to the Minions and Spider-Man. 'Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing,' Disney said in its complaint. Midjourney did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company is defending itself in another federal case in California brought by artists who allege Midjourney illegally trained its AI image generation models on their copyrighted works. The latest confrontation expands the number of high-profile cases from copyright holders seeking to guard their works from the reach of technology firms. A question at the heart of all these lawsuits: Can artificial intelligence companies use copyrighted material to train generative AI models without asking the owner of that data for permission? Another such clash came earlier this week when social media site Reddit (RDDT) sued AI startup Anthropic ( a company backed by tech giants Amazon (AMZN) and Google (GOOG, GOOGL) that created the AI language model Claude. Reddit is claiming in the new lawsuit that Anthropic intentionally scraped Reddit users' personal data without their consent and then put their data to work training Claude. Reddit said in its complaint that Anthropic "bills itself as the white knight of the AI industry" and argues that "it is anything but." Anthropic said last year that it had blocked its bots from Reddit's website, according to the complaint. But Reddit said Anthropic 'continued to hit Reddit's servers over one hundred thousand times.' An Anthropic spokesperson said, "We disagree with Reddit's claims and will defend ourselves vigorously." Anthropic is also defending itself against a separate suit from music publishers, including Universal Music Group (0VD.F), ABKCO, and Concord, alleging that Anthropic infringed on copyrights for Beyoncé, the Rolling Stones, and other artists as it trained Claude on lyrics to more than 500 songs. Courts haven't settled on a definitive answer to the question of whether artificial intelligence companies can use copyrighted material to train generative AI models without permission. However, last February, the US District Court for Delaware handed copyright holder Thomson Reuters a win in a case that could impact what data training models can legally collect. The court granted Thomson Reuters' request for summary judgment, saying that its competitor, Ross, infringed on its copyrights by using lawsuit summaries to train its AI model. The court rejected Ross's argument that it could use the summaries under the concept of fair use, which allows copyrights to be used for news reporting, teaching, research, criticism, and commentary. One big name featuring prominently in some of these clashes is OpenAI ( the creator of chatbot ChatGPT that is run by Sam Altman and backed by Microsoft (MSFT). Comedian Sarah Silverman has accused the companies in a lawsuit of copying material from her book and 7 million pirated works in order to train its AI systems. Parenting website Mumsnet has also accused OpenAI of scraping its six-billion-word database without consent. But perhaps the most prominent case targeting OpenAI is from the New York Times (NYT), which in 2023 filed a lawsuit accusing OpenAI and Microsoft of illegally using millions of the news outlet's published stories to train OpenAI's language models. The newspaper has said that ChatGPT at times generates query answers that closely mirror its original publications. Last week, OpenAI called the lawsuit "baseless" and appealed a judge's recent order in that case requiring the AI developer to preserve 'output data' generated by ChatGPT. OpenAI and Microsoft are using a defense similar to those raised in other AI training copyright disputes: that the Times' publicly available content falls under the fair use doctrine and, therefore, can be used to train its models. Getty Images is trying to chip away at that same argument in lawsuits in the US and United Kingdom filed in 2023 against AI image generation startup Stability. The UK case went to trial on Monday. Stability argues that fair use (or "fair dealing" as it's known in the UK) justified training its technology, Stable Diffusion, on copyrighted Getty material. That same defense has hallmarks of justification that Google has been asserting for the past two decades to fight lawsuits claiming it violated copyright laws when pulling information into results for users' search queries. In 2005, the Authors Guild sued Google over millions of books that the tech giant scanned and made available in 'snippets' to online searchers. Google didn't pay for the copyrighted information but did provide word-for-word pieces of the copyrighted works in search results. The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reasoned in a decision that Google's scanning project tested the limits of fair use but was 'transformative' and therefore protected under fair use law. In 2016, Getty Images sued Google over similar claims, alleging that Google violated its copyrights and antitrust law by displaying Getty's high-resolution images in Google search results. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Patricia Arquette on If Cobel Did a Better Job Than Mr. Milchick, and Why Mrs. Selvig Is So Bad at Recycling
Patricia Arquette is really, really into the world of Severance. What she's really, really not into is discussing fan theories. Not because she doesn't care, rather because she cares too much to risk spoiling anything. In another world, Arquette might be racking up karma way down your Reddit rabbit hole. But in this world, Lumon (and Apple TV+) is listening. More from The Hollywood Reporter 'The Studio' Guest Star Martin Scorsese Thought a Scene Was "Wrong" But Didn't Want to Be a "Backseat Director," Says Creator 'Echo Valley' Review: Julianne Moore and Sydney Sweeney Star in Apple TV+'s Satisfyingly Tense Domestic Thriller Ted Sarandos' 'Studio' Appearance Is a Wink - And a Flex Here's the thing though: with all due respect to other terrific (and eligible) dramas like The White Lotus and The Diplomat, Severance deserves all of the Emmys. But first, it needs the votes. Part of that process includes putting talent front-and-center in the press. Fear not, fellow Outties, we've got you. Was season one or more of a challenge for you as an actor? I don't even know how to really parcel out the first season from the reality of the world of the first season. We were shooting during COVID. I got contact-traced, I don't know, six or seven times or something. So I ended up— I kept getting put alone in a room for like 10 days at a time, and I started to kind of lose my cool. We didn't have [vaccines] yet. We were all wearing those plastic masks. Nobody could see you smile. It was a very dystopian experience on the set. Should viewers be rooting for Cobel at this point? Do you want fans of the show to like her? I don't really care if they like you or not like you. I mean, people go through life making 'the bad guy,' making 'the good guy,' and then the bad guy's the good guy and the good guy's the bad guy. She just has to have her perspective on why she's doing what she's doing. We go through life looking at people in the certain way that we frame them, and then they say or do something, and we reframe them. And so I think that we're going to do the same thing with Cobel. Cobel is at a very weird precipice right now where it's like it really could go either way. She could go to supporting Mark and all those guys, sticking one to Lumon, or she could consolidate her power at Lumon, get more respect there and be in a more powerful position, like she had been at one point in time. Did Mrs. Selvig legitimately care for Mark Scout? Yeah. I mean, I approached Mrs. Selvig in many ways. Yes, I think both sides of her care about Mark and are interested in what he's doing, both personally but also academically. What she was surprised by with Mrs. Selvig was— she got to put down the laws of Lumon. So it's like, 'Oh, we're kind of chummy. Is this what it's like to be not indoctrinated into this? Is this how people make friends? We're real friends and we're going somewhere together and it's not to a Kier Remembrance Day.' So, yeah, I think there's a part of her that's really fascinated and comes alive, but it's awkward and uncomfortable because it doesn't really know what it's doing. It's also that weird mixture of stalker and friend…there's a weird energy to that. Why is she so bad at recycling? We definitely talked about making her fumbling, bumbling. To insinuate yourself into someone's life, the biggest manipulators act like the most innocent victims. The most dangerous manipulators act like they're just this sweet, innocent, couldn't-hurt-a-fly person. That really can be very scary. She's got some element of that, like, I have to disarm him by being the fumbling, bumbling aunt from next door. And, 'Oh, I need your help' and 'I'm an older woman than you' and 'Oh, you don't have to worry about me.' So there is a damsel in distress device. Did Cobel do a better job than Milchick? Oh yes, come on now! What kind of question is that? Yeah, I mean, I think that like such a horrible betrayal to her. Because she felt like he was under her tutelage. And even though she was a tough and mean kind of boss, sometimes she was doing it for his own good. And she was also weird in this way, of like, almost like a drill sergeant. They're supposed to be kind of mean. It's a little bit part of the protocol within Lumon — of the old school, especially that she came up in — there's a certain way of treating people you're training. But she's pretty sad that Milchick stabbed her in the back. That he usurped her. Why is the MDR team allowed to roam the halls of Lumon so freely? I've had that conversation also, a concern in a weird way, where the viewer would be like, 'Wait a minute, wouldn't [Cobel] have seen this? They're doing that — can't Cobel see that?' There's something about— I don't know, I don't want to give away things. What they do, informs. Also, here's the thing. I don't think Lumon was so aware of what Cobel was doing and experimenting with. They have a very fine, limited view of what they thought was going on in this experiment, which is not the same idea of the experiment as to what Cobel is doing. How did you come up with Cobel's unique affectation? I was like, watching Maude and all these weird shows. It was sort of a little bit of a tip of the hat to Bea Arthur. And this idea of, like, this world where upper management sounded a certain way. That power sounded a certain way. And maybe how that wouldn't quite be right — it wouldn't sound exactly authentic if it came from a poor kid who was looking up at this rich family, imagining what they sounded like, imagining what they talked like, imagining what this thing was. So, yeah, it's not completely authentic. But she also grew up in this school in a weird way, like with nuns, or with, you know, being indoctrinated by these kind of people who were zealots. So they sounded the most like this. This is her child interpretation of that. You're really into this world huh? I am really into it. But I have to say, Cobel is— she has a whole things going on on her own. She is not somebody who feels comfortable telling people, letting people in, or any of that. And yet she also has incredible hubris and is driven and convinced that she's right. So it's like, in a weird way, it's very lonely, because she's got her whole own agenda, and she doesn't share it with anybody. This might be a stupid question, but did you write any of Cobel's notebook? I love this question, actually. Oh, thank you. It's part of what I love so much about being in the movie business and all the different departments. Our prop department is off-the-hook insane accomplished. Cat (PMG Property Master Catherine Miller) is amazing. So, no. They actually hire people to write stuff. Like, 'I need 10 pages written about blah, blah, blah.' I've seen it throughout my career on different sets. On some, they're actually sticking with the agenda of what the scene is about. And some they're just writing shit so you're rifling through and they're like, 'It's 4 a.m. I'm so sick of this job. How many more pages left do I have to write?' They're pretty hilarious. But this— anything on [Severance] is really drilled-down right. You actually could focus on each page. You could print a book out of it. What they're coming up with and writing is really good. This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. Best of The Hollywood Reporter 'The Studio': 30 Famous Faces Who Play (a Version of) Themselves in the Hollywood-Based Series 22 of the Most Shocking Character Deaths in Television History A 'Star Wars' Timeline: All the Movies and TV Shows in the Franchise