Sponsored message
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

This archival content was originally written for and published on KPCC.org. Keep in mind that links and images may no longer work — and references may be outdated.

KPCC Archive

McCourt divorce trial resumes

Frank McCourt, owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, arrives at Los Angeles County Superior Court for day two of a non-jury divorce trial on August 31, 2010 in Los Angeles, California.
Frank McCourt, owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, arrives at Los Angeles County Superior Court for day two of a non-jury divorce trial on August 31, 2010 in Los Angeles, California.
(
Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images
)

This story is free to read because readers choose to support LAist. If you find value in independent local reporting, make a donation to power our newsroom today.

Listen 1:00
McCourt divorce trial resumes
McCourt divorce trial resumes

After a two-week break, the divorce trial of Frank and Jamie McCourt resumes this morning in a Los Angeles courtroom. This week should shed more light on which McCourt owns the Dodgers.

When we last checked on the soap opera that is the McCourts’ divorce trial, Frank McCourt had finished on the witness stand – and Jamie had just begun answering questions. The biggest question is, who owns the Dodgers?

Frank said he does; he said he and Jamie worked out a post-nuptial agreement that put the family houses in her name and the team in his. He said Jamie didn’t like the risk of owning a sports team – so if the Dodger deal went bad, she wanted the houses safe from creditors. As we’ve learned from documents made public in the divorce, the McCourt deal to buy the Dodgers involves a lot of borrowed money.

Jamie McCourt’s argument that she co-owns the Dodgers goes like this: Frank portrays himself as the sole owner – but when the McCourts bought the team, Jamie was presented publicly as a co-owner. And there are documents the soon-to-be-ex-couple signed that list her as a co-owner; Frank says they’re wrong – but there they are. The lawyer who drew up those papers could testify tomorrow.

You come to LAist because you want independent reporting and trustworthy local information. Our newsroom doesn’t answer to shareholders looking to turn a profit. Instead, we answer to you and our connected community. We are free to tell the full truth, to hold power to account without fear or favor, and to follow facts wherever they lead. Our only loyalty is to our audiences and our mission: to inform, engage, and strengthen our community.

Right now, LAist has lost $1.7M in annual funding due to Congress clawing back money already approved. The support we receive from readers like you will determine how fully our newsroom can continue informing, serving, and strengthening Southern California.

If this story helped you today, please become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission. It just takes 1 minute to donate below.

Your tax-deductible donation keeps LAist independent and accessible to everyone.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief

Make your tax-deductible donation today

A row of graphics payment types: Visa, MasterCard, Apple Pay and PayPal, and  below a lock with Secure Payment text to the right