A divorced woman brought a fraud claim against her former TV-writer ex-husband for allegedly hiding millions in assets at the time that they entered their divorce settlement.
She argued that she was pushed into accepting millions less than she should have received, because he “cried poverty”.
Yet then he reportedly turned around and bought a mansion on Central Park West.
The court found for her ex, because it ruled that she hadn’t proved her case.
Illustrating yet again that, in court, the difference between knowing and being able to prove is all the difference in the world.