DATE: Wednesday, November 26, 1997          TAG: 9711260513

SECTION: LOCAL                   PAGE: B5   EDITION: FINAL 

SOURCE: BY MARC DAVIS, STAFF WRITER 

DATELINE: NORFOLK                           LENGTH:   70 lines

WIDOW OF DEL. GEORGE H. HEILIG JR. COUNTERSUES HIS LOVER WIFE OF 32 YEARS SAYS THE OTHER WOMAN ISN'T ENTITLED TO ANY PART OF HIS ESTATE.

The widow of a veteran state delegate has countersued a woman who claims she deserves part of the delegate's life savings because she was his lover for the past two years.

Mary P. Heilig, widow of the late Del. George H. Heilig Jr., has countersued the other woman, Cynthia M. Gerard, for $141,000 - money that her husband allegedly spent on Gerard during their two-year relationship.

Mary Heilig, who was married to the delegate for 32 years, says her husband had no right to give away some of their life savings.

Mary Heilig also says Gerard isn't entitled to $1 million from her husband's estate. Mary Heilig argues that the court should not reward Gerard for adultery.

``(Gerard) asks the court to treat her as though she were the widow of George Heilig, despite her own marriage to another man. . . ,'' wrote Mary Heilig's attorneys, Anne B. Shumadine and Mary Jane Hall. ``The law must not deliver such a slap in the face to Heilig's widow.''

George Heilig was one of Virginia's senior legislators. He was a state delegate for 26 years and chaired a powerful committee that regulated banks and insurance companies. He died of a heart attack Sept. 30.

At the time, George and Mary Heilig, both 54, were in the midst of a divorce. Mary Heilig had sued for divorce in February 1996, accusing him of desertion, but the divorce was never finalized.

Heilig apparently died without a will, even though he was a lawyer. Under state law, that means his $2 million estate would go to his wife.

But on Oct. 28, just one month after Heilig died, Gerard sued his estate and Mary Heilig personally.

Gerard claimed that she was George Heilig's lover for the last two years of his life and had cared for him when he was nearly blind.

Gerard, who is in her 40s and is still married, said George Heilig promised repeatedly to take care of her for life. As a result, she claims, she quit her job with the Salvation Army and gave her husband her share of their house and car.

She and George Heilig then bought a house together in New Mexico in 1995 and a housing lot on Hatteras Island, N.C., in 1996.

But in newly filed legal papers, Mary Heilig argues that Gerard has no claim on George Heilig's estate.

``This case offers an unusual presentation of the so-called `palimony' cause of action,'' Mary Heilig's attorneys wrote in a legal brief.

The usual palimony case involves an unmarried woman suing her former live-in companion for future support. But ``in this postmortem version,'' the lawyers wrote, a married woman is suing her lover's widow.

That's unfair and illegal, the lawyers conclude; Virginia law does not reward a woman for engaging in adultery.

``This entire cause of action is founded upon immoral and illegal acts,'' the lawyers wrote.

If Gerard wins this case, the lawyers concluded, then Virginia would be recognizing rights arising from an illegal relationship and taking away rights arising from marriage.

The lawyers also argue that George Heilig's oral promises to Gerard are unenforceable. They are not contracts, the lawyers wrote, because Heilig received no ``consideration'' - that is, he got nothing in return.

They ask that Gerard's case be thrown out.

Gerard's attorney, C. Jay Robbins IV, replied Wednesday that his client did give up something for George Heilig's promises - her house, her car and her job.

``I think her (Mary Heilig's) brief sheds a lot of heat but very little light on the legal issues involved,'' Robbins said.

No hearing date has been set. The case has been assigned to a retired judge from Fairfax County, Richard J. Jamborsky. KEYWORDS: LAWSUITS

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu