[Bazzwaldo]

(08-28-2018 03:30 PM)MKDAWUSS Wrote:  

Legally I'd say he's responsible for his portion of any unpaid expenses.

Why
There was no contract between the parties outlining each party's financial obligation
Unless Paul had made a prior agreement to pay all or half the bill, Id say the case against him is flimsy
Societies expectation that the male pays the bill (as supported by two restaurateurs financial claim on him) doesn't make him legally responsible either
Paul obviously knows his sexual market value (expecting the woman to pay) and the women involved have trouble accepting the role reversal
Give the man a free drink!