Woman sues Broadcom billionaire for $70 million, saying he abused her

[Marty McGraw]

Source: Los Angeles times


An Orange County woman has sued billionaire Henry T. Nicholas III for $70 million, alleging that the Broadcom Corp. co-founder reneged on his promise to support her financially for life and subjected her to violent and abusive behavior during the four years they lived together.

In her complaint, filed Jan. 8 in Orange County Superior Court, Melissa Montero said she was 34 and Nicholas was 50 when they met in January 2009. Montero eventually quit her job as a restaurant manager and moved in to his Newport Coast mansion, according to the lawsuit.

“Nicholas promised Montero that if she would quit her job and dedicate her life to him, he would provide her financial support and pay her expenses and other needs for the rest of her life,” her complaint alleges, stating that Nicholas went on to give her about $25,000 a month.

“In exchange, Montero gave up her own life and devoted her every waking hour to Nicholas and his needs and demands,” the lawsuit contends. It describes her as his “personal assistant, secretary, business advisor, life coach, confidante, nurse … social companion, household manager, social coordinator, stepmother to Nicholas’ children and liaison to Nicholas’ ex-wife.” The lawsuit also states that Montero sought a monogamous relationship and children with Nicholas but instead learned that he was romantically involved with another woman, to whom he was paying $125,000 a month. It also alleges that he abused an array of drugs, including cocaine, methamphetamine, ecstasy and nitrous oxide.

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-broadcom-billionaire-sued-20160114-story.html

---

oh.. how the priveleged class view their 'entitlements'. But we hold these kind of people as our success's and who to achieve to be like. I hope we are seeing the start of a true cultural change - and none too soon.

[neohippie]

1. just curious

If she was with him since January 2009, and she received approximately $25,000 a month, wouldn't that be about 1.8 million dollars, should be enough for her to get by the rest of her life at least it would be for me

[Marty McGraw]

3. apparently

Not when those dollar signs replace the pupils in the eyes.

[LanternWaste]

4. I'd imagine she warrants more than her coke-snorting husband's girlfriend.

His mistress was receiving 125k/month. I'd imagine she warrants more than her coke-snorting husband's girlfriend.

[neohippie]

9. I didn't mean to imply she doesn't deserve something

She probably does deserve something more, and I guess it would depend on the state laws about common law marriage etc... But it also sounds like she knew what she was getting into early on enough that she made choices about what she was willing to accept and live with for this long

[Ace Rothstein]

10. Most states don't have common law marriage.

[Chakab]

14. There's no common law marriage in California. Unless she has some kind of contractual agreement

with him, she's not entitled to anything.

It's possible to make claims for unjust enrichment if you can prove that your contribution to a relationship led to your partner accumulating wealth that you didn't receive a share of; however, he was already wealthy and established in business before they met. This lawsuit doesn't have a leg to stand on.

[Blue_Tires]

2. Holy damn girfriends are expensive out west...

$125k every month??

If she didn't get something down on paper, she's SOL

[Chakab]

5. The woman was a restaurant manager before she hooked up with this guy. I don't think that qualifies

her as being a member of the "privileged class."
'
A lot of people from all walks of life think that they're entitled to a share of their former partner's assets after a relationship ends irrespective of whether their contribution to the relationship had anything whatsoever to do with the accumulation of their partner's wealth.

[Marty McGraw]

6. How desperate

an animal our system of inequality have made many. Losing and (perhaps foolishly) investing a good chunk of time on a gamble that doesn't shake out can really take one's foothold on a career path down the tank.

Fear like a lot of us had during the 2008 downturn that left a good many w/o a job and an upturned nose by any who would interview ya if, god forbid, one was away from the job market for any short period of time.

Hard to say where her former 1.8M was invested toward. Perhaps a good chunk went toward making the kids happy. That is still a big wad of cash.

[Chakab]

7. I seriously doubt that she was making anywhere near $25,000/month in her previous line of employment

Irrespective of whether the relationship ultimately failed, she came into a financial windfall stemming from this relationship. She should have saved/invested a good portion of the cash that she received from her partner instead of pissing away with the expectation that he was going to pamper her for life rather than toss her aside for another younger woman after he got bored.

[Shrike47]

8. His mistress complains he had another mistress? Ho, ho, ho.

[closeupready]

11. No. She can work for her living, like everyone else does.

[NotHardly]

12. No feminists on the board today I see ...

Sure, its all her fault ... sure love them liberals we got in here. Woman bashing comes pretty easy to this troop.

[Chakab]

13. So unless I believe that a woman is entitled to millions of dollars because she had a failed

relationship with a wealthy man, which started after he'd accumulated his wealth, I'm some kind of misogynist?

[truthisfreedom]

15. Rich guys shouldn't piss off women they're basically paying for companionship.

Classic sugarbaby/sugardaddy trouble.

[Chakab]

16. ..and maybe women who are essentially prostitutes (your characterization not mine) shouldn't

overestimate the parameters and fundamental nature of their relationships with their benefactors.

[Marty McGraw]

17. I side with both points of view

here. especially when it comes to people by more modest means. In this case I think we have two people more on the rotten extreme of society exposing Ugly with those extremes.