Husband wants kidney back from wife, or $1.5 million divorce settlement

Husband wants kidney back from wife, or $1.5 million divorce settlement
Submitted by Amit Pathania on Thu, 01/08/2009 - 07:24 Long Island New York

In a one-of-its-kind divorce case, which medical ethicists already say is a nonstarter, a Long Island surgeon either wants the kidney - that the donated to his wife - back, or else is seeking a $1.5 million settlement for the donated organ!

Dr. Richard Batista, a surgeon at Nassau University Medical Center since 1992, donated his kidney to his wife, Dawnell Batista, in June
2001, in order to save her life after she had undergone two unsuccessful kidney transplants.

At a news conference in Garden City, Dr. Batista, 49, said that the second thing he looked forward to, after his kidney was transplanted to his wife, was turning around their marriage which had been rickety because of Dawnell's illness.

http://topnews.us/content/22188-husband-wants-kidney-back-wife-or-15-million-divorce-settlement

LOL! No, I DON'T want to know. I saw something like that on Law and Order. :D




http://angelasdiscountmarket.com/angela.html

(Random line from The Big Lebowski, just substituting kidney for toe.)

What an asshole.

:silly:

this case is not as simple as it may at first appear.

"Dawnell Batista, a 44-year-old nurse, filed for divorce in July 2005, which her husband countersued the same year.

Dr. Batista's attorney, Dominic Barbara, said the demand for the kidney was not part of the original countersuit; it was the latest introduction, after Dawnell did not allow him the agreed-upon visitation with the couple's three children- who are aged 14, 11 and 8."

The 'kidney' matter will likely be deleted from the suit,imo, as such 'relief' would be clearly against 'public policy,' as is her alleged behavior!

He's saying that he's contributed a kidney to the marriage, so the final settlement should include monetary recognition of that fact, just as it would consider a house he brought into the marriage. It's just a way for him to work the kidney donation into the final settlement, hoping for a more favorable ruling.

The case is sad. He donated a kidney, then she started having an affair, then left him and took their young kids, and kept him from seeing them. No idea who to side with, or whether both are just jerks. The affair makes it seem like her fault, but of course we all know people who are so controlling or abusive that the spouse tries to escape any way they can.

But it's clear he doesn't expect the kidney back, it's just a monetary consideration he wants considered.

they are entitled to part of, since they paid for them. Usually those claims are rejected. Since the kidney was once part of him, it seems like a better argument. On the other hand, the kidney was obviously meant to be a donation and not something to be considered communal property, so it's still a weak claim. I suspect it's more of his attempt to influence the judge by showing that he made this great sacrifice which should reflect well on him.

He said he hoped this would never become a story, because it was just part of his overall divorce case, and he didn't want it blown out of proportion. That was wistful thinking! I bet they get more than $1.5 million for the movie rights alone.

BTW, I'm not a lawyer or anything, this story has just fascinated me.