OFF, OFF TOPIC	   
        
   I noticed several folks here like to discuss legal issues.  I heard the   
   following story and thought there might be interest in it here.  (Note--this   
   is only an informal brief narrative, I don't have an official transcript).   
        
   A bride gets married at a big lavish wedding.  Bride had wanted something   
   small and simple, but her parents firmly vetoed her wishes and made it clear   
   she had an obligation to her family.  The entire wedding was planned by the   
   family, with no input or    
   participation by the bride.  Likewise, the groom selected, booked, and paid   
   for the honeymoon on his own.     
      
   During the prep time just before the wedding began, the bride announced that   
   the wedding dress selected for her was inappropriate and she refused to wear   
   it.  She walked down the aisle in a plain dress instead.     
      
   On the marriage license, the bride merely drew an undecipherable scrawl for   
   her signature.  No one noticed.   
      
   The bridesmaids who were friends of the bride felt the selected bridesmaid   
   dresses were too expensive.  The bride previously had secretly told them to   
   wear any nice dress that they could wear again instead of wasting their money   
   on a ugly dress they    
   wouldn't use again.  The bride's parents were angry when this discovered all   
   of this, but it was time for the wedding and nothing could be done at that   
   point.   
      
   The bride posed for her only one picture and refused to do more, saying the   
   flash hurt her eyes.  The bride told her parents that pictures could be taken   
   later.  The bride's parents and her groom were very angry at her at this   
   point.  The bride responded    
   that if they didn't back off, she'd walk.   
      
   In the ceremony, the bride barely mumbled "I do".  When the priest asked to   
   repeat it louder, she just glared at him.  He continued with the ceremony.   
      
   When the priest said the groom could kiss the bride, the bride turned away so   
   that it became just a brief hug.   
      
   Two hours into the reception, she catches her husband in the cloakroom with a   
   girl.  Bride takes photo.  She claims he is making out with her, he says it   
   was only an innocent good luck kiss.  Bride tells her husband the marriage is   
   over and to take the    
   girl on the honeymoon in her place.   Bride then sees the priest who married   
   them and asks for an immediate annulment and not to file the marriage license;   
   priest refuses.  Bride tells her friends what happened and leaves reception.    
   Reception continues,    
   the family makes excuses for missing bride.   
        
   Bride immediately files court papers for annulment claiming the husband was   
   not who he claimed to be.   
       
   At the hearing held a month later, the groom contests the annulment, saying   
   the bride's claims are groundless.  He also assserts that if she wants to end   
   the marriage, he wants his rights protected in a formal divorce proceeding.    
   he noted that he spent    
   thousands of dollars for an unused non-refundable honeymoon.  The bride's   
   father speaks, saying the groom is a wonderful man and this is all a   
   misunderstanding.  He says his daughter was under tremendous stress from the   
   wedding, and just needs time to    
   rest and maybe get some counseling.  He does not want her to make a foolish   
   decision with the annulment.   
      
      
      
   RULING:   
      
   The judge noted the bride's father testimony that she was very stressed to   
   abandon the wedding so quickly.  The judge then said the bride must have been   
   too stressed out to competently enter into the marriage.  The annulment was   
   granted.   
      
      
   AFTERMATH:   
      
   There were no winners.     
      
   Everybody was angry at the bride, feeling that she acted, at the least,   
   irresponsibly, and possibly deceitfully.  The bride was angry at being   
   pressured into a wedding she didn't want.   
      
   The groom demanded the bride return the engagement ring, she said she would do   
   so when she was reimbursed for her legal fees for the annulment process and   
   any other issues.     
      
   The bride's father felt humiliated after spending considerable money on a   
   lavish party, with many of his business associates as guests, only to see the   
   marriage evaporate.  He refused to have anything to do with his daughter.  The   
   bride was halfway    
   through graduate school, paid for by her father; he said he would no longer   
   pay for it.   
      
   Both the bride and groom were employed by her father, who was a prosperous   
   businessman.  He was furious at this daughter's actions.  He terminated his   
   daughter from his company, though he retained the groom.   
      
   The groom's family demanded the bride reimburse all of their expenses,   
   including an expensive unused honeymoon trip, travel and lodging, return of   
   all gifts.  They claimed she committed fraud.  The bride, through her lawyer,   
   countered that she had no    
   part of booking the honeymoon trip and that the groom still could've gone on   
   his own and taken a friend.  The groom claimed the bride was actually never   
   interested in getting married and her action subject him to ridicule and   
   needless expense.  The bride'   
   s lawyer responded that it was her family that bore most the wedding's expense   
   and the bride ended up with nothing.  The groom and his family considered   
   litigation but were advised they had no case.     
      
   The bride refused to have anything to do with the gifts.  During her time at   
   the reception she never handled any gifts. It turned out that prior to the   
   wedding she had been sent several expensive gifts in advance but she refused   
   to accept delivery of    
   them.  Now some of these gifts were lost and the bride now refused to accept   
   any responsibility for them (there were no delivery receipts with her   
   signature).  She told the groom he would have to research lost gifts, pursue   
   claims against the shippers,    
   ship back non-monetary gifts, and to send back checks or keep the money for   
   himself.  Several relatives whose gifts were lost were bitter, especially   
   after receiving a testy letter from the bride stating she had never received   
   their gift and therefore    
   had nothing to return to them.   
      
   When the groom agreed not to sue her, the bride returned the engagement ring.   
      
   The bride also requested a Church annulment, but they refused.  [I don't know   
   Catholic law or their policy, but apparently they felt she knew in advance she   
   would back out and should have done so, by not doing so, she made a mockery of   
   a holy sacrament.]   
      
      
      
   ****   
      
   So, legal eagles, what do you think?   
      
   I am no lawyer, but I think this was more of a moral/family conflict than a   
   legal one.     
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)