High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / uncertainty

Published · transcript-backed

James Sexton: uncertainty

18 Sept 2023 Lex Fridman Podcast #396 – James Sexton: Divorce Lawyer on Marriage, Relationships, Sex, Lies & Love

“Is she in there in a sauna with the suit on? And the appellate court essentially said, “I don’t know why you married this person having had them make you sign this, but it’s binding, but it’s binding.”

— James Sexton

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
James Sexton
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
uncertainty
Recorded
18 Sept 2023
Publisher
Lex Fridman Podcast

Transcript context

…But how does that work in a prenup? Well, no, actually it’s the same. What you’re doing with a prenup is you’re identifying how things will be classified in advance. So you’re creating a set of rules, and then you both can function under those rules during the marriage. So for a brief time, I taught a family law drafting class at a law school, and when we would do separation agreements and we would do pleadings, it was lots of fun. When we would do prenups, I would say to the students, “What’s the main thing you need when you’re doing a prenup?” And they would say, “Well, you need asset disclosure.” And I’d say, “Well, that’s not the main thing.” And they’d say, “Well, you need technical language.” They’d say, “Nope.” Main thing you need is a crystal ball. The main thing you need is the ability to see what’s going to happen in the future. Who’s going to have money, who’s not, who’s going to be successful, who isn’t, what people will inherit. Problem is we don’t have that. We don’t have that. So what can we do? We can create tranches, we can create structures, we can create systems, and then people can live with those in mind. You enter the game knowing the rules. So you know if this is going to be a submission only event. You know if this is going to be no time limit. You know if we’re after a certain number of minutes, we’re going into points now. So I can work with that rule set and I’m going to amend my game based on that rule set. Same thing, same thing. You’re just going to say, “Look, what’s the rule set? Let’s agree on the rule set. And then, let’s conduct ourselves with the rule set in mind. Let’s plan the rule set in mind.” By the way, and if you’re going to cheat, you cheat with the rule set in mind. You know you’re cheating. You’re trying to get around the rule set. When I do a consult for a prenup, the first thing I do is here’s what’s going to happen legally if you marry without a prenup. Here’s what happens to your rights and obligations. Then, what we can change with that, there’s almost no limit. You can amend anything you want to. The example I always give is there was a case that went up to the appellate court where a high net worth guy married a very beautiful woman and there was a provision in the prenuptial agreement that said for every 10 pounds she gained during the marriage, she would lose $10,000 a month in alimony if they divorced. Here’s her baseline weight as of the time of execution of this agreement. I wondered if she did what a wrestler does. Did she bulk up right before and then cut when she eventually got divorced? Is she in there in a sauna with the suit on? And the appellate court essentially said, “I don’t know why you married this person having had them make you sign this, but it’s binding, but it’s binding. ” I wish somebody would do a contract like the rent for this place would be more expensive if I was fatter, and cheaper if I was skinnier, and that way I would have to weigh in and like the motivation.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.

Search evidence