How could I permit this week to polish itself off without transmitting this story, by Barbara Ross and Thomas Tracy, in today’s Daily News?
Henry Owsley is a banker. He and his wife, Danica Cordell-Reeh, were separated in 2000. As part of their divorce negotiations, Owsley agreed to “reimburse Cordell-Reeh for the nanny for the couple’s twins, in addition to tens of thousands of dollars in child support, private school tuition and health care.”
Well, Owsley is now claiming that his ex spent only one-third of the nanny money on a nanny. (The twins, by the way, are now 17, sort of beyond nanny-age, one would think.)
So Owsley is suing Cordell-Reeh “for pocketing more than $263,000 she claimed went to a live-in nanny she never hired.” And he wants $2.5 mil in punitive damages. Hey, it’s a good number, let’s just toss that in.
Oh, and let us not forget (even if we didn’t know about it in the first place), this “bitter divorce made headlines after a nanny accused the real estate executive mom of sexually abusing and starving her twins…”
Once more, with feeling: aren’t you glad that you are not rich?