Kevin Costner divorce

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The articles say he was planning to file if she hadn’t done it first. Would she have gotten more if she had not tried to leave? I would never have signed that prenup. I would have signed A prenup, but not that one.

Signed,
SAHM who hasn’t worked in 16 years (with no prenup thankfully)

I don’t think the full prenup has been released. She’s challenging what she’s eligible for which may be based on specific terms.

He's claiming he owes her $1.3 or $1.4M plus the child support and monthly amount towards a rental home. I haven't read anything that says how long the rental allowance will go. Until the youngest child turns 18? Then what? Having 20 years of marriage and no meaningful assets to show for it is pretty terrible. Something in the prenup should have been tied to the length of the marriage, and which person initiated the divorce. Seems to me like she played her cards all wrong here - will be interesting to see what happens.

She could have amassed her own assets and she will have rights to any of the assets that she contributed to amassing during the marriage. They had a nanny and multiple household staff so it wasn't like she couldn't work. This prenup is very similar to Kelly Clarksons and hers was upheld by the court. She only needed to pay her exhusband 1.3 million (a pittance compared to her income of 1.9 million a month), and she evicted him from the property he was living in, and she kept all the houses and assets gained by her work during the marriage! She did have to pay him alimony of 100K a month for 18 months for him to have time to establish his own financial independence, and she is paying him 46K a month in child support so it isn't like he will struggle - same as Costner's wife.

But the monthly amounts are not forever. Then what? Is she expected to save those amounts rather than spend them? Maybe. I'm not disagreeing that the prenup could hold. I just don't understand why she and Brandon Blackstock signed this rubbish. Lots of women are SAHM's for 20+ years and they have all the rights to an equal share of what was earned during the marriage by the working spouse. Why would someone agree to $1.3M?? That wasn't even that much 20 years ago! Were they drugged? I just don't get it.

In Christine's case, I believe Kevin is providing a house as well so she has minimal expenses she needs to cover. Her monthly amounts should go a long ways given her housing and all child related costs are covered (many times over). If she gets a job that covers the basics for herself and invests / spends the monthly amount wisely - she should be able to live quite nicely. Her lifestyle will take a hit for sure but that is the reality of divorce for many. I am sure they sign to show they are in it for love and not for the money. Christine has gotten to live a luxurious lifestyle of excess for almost 20 years that has been entirely provided for her, spending as she wished from the sounds of it. That is a massive benefit that most people don't get through marriage. Twenty years of being handed life on a plate and living like the rich and famous based solely on the work and effort of another is a pretty good ride.

He is not providing a house. He is providing a monthly rental allowance, which presumably will end at some point. The youngest child is what, 13? I'm guessing these monthly amounts will last 5 years at best. I'm not saying she hasn't lived a great life, but I don't think she has accumulated any assets and it sounds to me like she is about to be up a creek with no paddle.

+1. Five years of rent and then what for the next 20, 30, 40 years?

His behavior is awful. He is trying to force her to give up and stay with him.
He already has a bad reputation but this is pretty extreme. I can look at their situation and think it looks like money to someone like me and people whom do not have spouses worth 400 mil plus unlimited earning potential after. If she is not on par with him her kids suffer and he retains more power. Also for long marriages the idea that you are nothing is horrible. I am glad people
are calling him out. He is not used to no.
His last wife said no after he begged her to stay and promised he would change. He didn’t. Hope he gets his
act together. Maybe she would change her mind if he got therapy (who
goes public about spouses plastic surgery) and agreed to some sort
of post nuptial agreement that gives
her more power in finances. You know
like a married couple.

Nobody is calling him out except a few crazies on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like she had a bad lawyer, or no lawyer, when she was negotiating the prenup 20 years ago. After 20 years, with his net worth, and his lifestyle needed to travel a lot, she should be getting more than that. The prenup should’ve been on more of a vesting schedule where she got more depending on how long they were married.

It’s so stupid when rich famous men try to screw their wives this way. It’s much smarter to give them enough money and perhaps an agreement not to malign in press or do a book deal

NP. Nobody cares. I’m sorry, but all the hysterics in this thread claiming that KC will lose fans are delusional. First, if they even know about it, there will be a lot of people who look at the situation and say, she was 30, she had a lawyer herself, and she signed a contract, too bad. Second, nobody cares what male celebrities do. Tom Cruise is hugely popular, for instance.

This thread seems to be populated by women who have a meager understanding of California pre-nup litigation. She could challenge but she is probably going to lose.

I don’t really understand all the takes in this thread that seem totally untethered to reality.

I have an above average understanding of CA family law and would wager money this prenup gets thrown out. The terms are egregious when you consider the relative wealth of the parties, the length of the marriage, 3 kids that she appeared to solo partner, her lack of any career or skills. There is a unique set of facts here that are different from other ultra high end divorces. He should settle.

Nope he has worked 50 years to amass that fortune and skills, she’s done nothing.

Stop quitting your jobs and trying to ride on the coats of others.

Not saying she deserves anything, but Dr Dre had a prenup and his awful wife still got 100million.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like she had a bad lawyer, or no lawyer, when she was negotiating the prenup 20 years ago. After 20 years, with his net worth, and his lifestyle needed to travel a lot, she should be getting more than that. The prenup should’ve been on more of a vesting schedule where she got more depending on how long they were married.

It’s so stupid when rich famous men try to screw their wives this way. It’s much smarter to give them enough money and perhaps an agreement not to malign in press or do a book deal

NP. Nobody cares. I’m sorry, but all the hysterics in this thread claiming that KC will lose fans are delusional. First, if they even know about it, there will be a lot of people who look at the situation and say, she was 30, she had a lawyer herself, and she signed a contract, too bad. Second, nobody cares what male celebrities do. Tom Cruise is hugely popular, for instance.

This thread seems to be populated by women who have a meager understanding of California pre-nup litigation. She could challenge but she is probably going to lose.

I don’t really understand all the takes in this thread that seem totally untethered to reality.

I have an above average understanding of CA family law and would wager money this prenup gets thrown out. The terms are egregious when you consider the relative wealth of the parties, the length of the marriage, 3 kids that she appeared to solo partner, her lack of any career or skills. There is a unique set of facts here that are different from other ultra high end divorces. He should settle.

Nope he has worked 50 years to amass that fortune and skills, she’s done nothing.

Stop quitting your jobs and trying to ride on the coats of others.

Not saying she deserves anything, but Dr Dre had a prenup and his awful wife still got 100million.

Context is key. Longer marriage (26 years), more generous prenup from the start, lots of properties purchased during their marriage, Dre entered into his most lucrative deal and sold during their marriage (Beats by Dre), and there were some highly interesting rumors which he certainly didn’t want getting out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like she had a bad lawyer, or no lawyer, when she was negotiating the prenup 20 years ago. After 20 years, with his net worth, and his lifestyle needed to travel a lot, she should be getting more than that. The prenup should’ve been on more of a vesting schedule where she got more depending on how long they were married.

It’s so stupid when rich famous men try to screw their wives this way. It’s much smarter to give them enough money and perhaps an agreement not to malign in press or do a book deal

NP. Nobody cares. I’m sorry, but all the hysterics in this thread claiming that KC will lose fans are delusional. First, if they even know about it, there will be a lot of people who look at the situation and say, she was 30, she had a lawyer herself, and she signed a contract, too bad. Second, nobody cares what male celebrities do. Tom Cruise is hugely popular, for instance.

This thread seems to be populated by women who have a meager understanding of California pre-nup litigation. She could challenge but she is probably going to lose.

I don’t really understand all the takes in this thread that seem totally untethered to reality.

I have an above average understanding of CA family law and would wager money this prenup gets thrown out. The terms are egregious when you consider the relative wealth of the parties, the length of the marriage, 3 kids that she appeared to solo partner, her lack of any career or skills. There is a unique set of facts here that are different from other ultra high end divorces. He should settle.

Nope he has worked 50 years to amass that fortune and skills, she’s done nothing.

Stop quitting your jobs and trying to ride on the coats of others.

Not saying she deserves anything, but Dr Dre had a prenup and his awful wife still got 100million.

Context is key. Longer marriage (26 years), more generous prenup from the start, lots of properties purchased during their marriage, Dre entered into his most lucrative deal and sold during their marriage (Beats by Dre), and there were some highly interesting rumors which he certainly didn’t want getting out.

Dre also settled. Kevin likely will too, but not for the numbers quoted here. I know there is mention that he has offered to pay the down payment on a house for her, but I bet in the end he buys her one outright.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like she had a bad lawyer, or no lawyer, when she was negotiating the prenup 20 years ago. After 20 years, with his net worth, and his lifestyle needed to travel a lot, she should be getting more than that. The prenup should’ve been on more of a vesting schedule where she got more depending on how long they were married.

It’s so stupid when rich famous men try to screw their wives this way. It’s much smarter to give them enough money and perhaps an agreement not to malign in press or do a book deal

NP. Nobody cares. I’m sorry, but all the hysterics in this thread claiming that KC will lose fans are delusional. First, if they even know about it, there will be a lot of people who look at the situation and say, she was 30, she had a lawyer herself, and she signed a contract, too bad. Second, nobody cares what male celebrities do. Tom Cruise is hugely popular, for instance.

This thread seems to be populated by women who have a meager understanding of California pre-nup litigation. She could challenge but she is probably going to lose.

I don’t really understand all the takes in this thread that seem totally untethered to reality.

I have an above average understanding of CA family law and would wager money this prenup gets thrown out. The terms are egregious when you consider the relative wealth of the parties, the length of the marriage, 3 kids that she appeared to solo partner, her lack of any career or skills. There is a unique set of facts here that are different from other ultra high end divorces. He should settle.

Nope he has worked 50 years to amass that fortune and skills, she’s done nothing.

Stop quitting your jobs and trying to ride on the coats of others.

Not saying she deserves anything, but Dr Dre had a prenup and his awful wife still got 100million.

Context is key. Longer marriage (26 years), more generous prenup from the start, lots of properties purchased during their marriage, Dre entered into his most lucrative deal and sold during their marriage (Beats by Dre), and there were some highly interesting rumors which he certainly didn’t want getting out.

19 is still pretty long. This wasn’t a flash in the pan.

And to the PP who asked, he still considers the Carpinteria, CA compound his primary residence and that’s where he wants her to leave. His main editing studio is there and he wants her out so he can use the studio without seeing her, per the prenup. She doesn’t seem to have much of a plan, given that she filed first.

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand why she rushed to file when she clearly doesn’t have a plan. Trying to break the prenup after filing is a dream not a plan.

[Anonymous]

She’s been ordered to vacate the property by the end of the month. Looks like the judge will uphold the prenup!

[Anonymous]

She may have to pay his lawyer fees too. lol. She better settle quickly or that $1M is going to evaporate. He was being more than generous with the cash offer, down payment on home, 12 mortgage payments and child support. She got greedy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She may have to pay his lawyer fees too. lol. She better settle quickly or that $1M is going to evaporate. He was being more than generous with the cash offer, down payment on home, 12 mortgage payments and child support. She got greedy.

You are absurd and Kevin is a real jerk. Almost up there with Tiger for the way he treats women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since when did a mere 18 years of marriage entitle anyone to never working again and living like queen until they croak off ex hubby’s dime? Especially if you signed a pre-nup. Girl bye. Go get a job, live modestly, or go find another sucker to leech off of.

Mere?!

[Anonymous]

Today’s ruling doesn’t bode well for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She may have to pay his lawyer fees too. lol. She better settle quickly or that $1M is going to evaporate. He was being more than generous with the cash offer, down payment on home, 12 mortgage payments and child support. She got greedy.

You are absurd and Kevin is a real jerk. Almost up there with Tiger for the way he treats women.

NP but why can’t we expect women to speak up for themselves and protect themselves? She’s an idiot. She signed this prenup, didn’t convince him to buy any joint property in 18 years, didn’t have her own investments, retirement, etc. She filed for divorce. Why not wait two years to build up some funds or investments or something before filing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She may have to pay his lawyer fees too. lol. She better settle quickly or that $1M is going to evaporate. He was being more than generous with the cash offer, down payment on home, 12 mortgage payments and child support. She got greedy.

You are absurd and Kevin is a real jerk. Almost up there with Tiger for the way he treats women.

NP but why can’t we expect women to speak up for themselves and protect themselves? She’s an idiot. She signed this prenup, didn’t convince him to buy any joint property in 18 years, didn’t have her own investments, retirement, etc. She filed for divorce. Why not wait two years to build up some funds or investments or something before filing?

He was already planning to file. She wouldn’t have had any extra time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The articles say he was planning to file if she hadn’t done it first. Would she have gotten more if she had not tried to leave? I would never have signed that prenup. I would have signed A prenup, but not that one.

Signed,
SAHM who hasn’t worked in 16 years (with no prenup thankfully)

I don’t think the full prenup has been released. She’s challenging what she’s eligible for which may be based on specific terms.

He's claiming he owes her $1.3 or $1.4M plus the child support and monthly amount towards a rental home. I haven't read anything that says how long the rental allowance will go. Until the youngest child turns 18? Then what? Having 20 years of marriage and no meaningful assets to show for it is pretty terrible. Something in the prenup should have been tied to the length of the marriage, and which person initiated the divorce. Seems to me like she played her cards all wrong here - will be interesting to see what happens.

She could have amassed her own assets and she will have rights to any of the assets that she contributed to amassing during the marriage. They had a nanny and multiple household staff so it wasn't like she couldn't work. This prenup is very similar to Kelly Clarksons and hers was upheld by the court. She only needed to pay her exhusband 1.3 million (a pittance compared to her income of 1.9 million a month), and she evicted him from the property he was living in, and she kept all the houses and assets gained by her work during the marriage! She did have to pay him alimony of 100K a month for 18 months for him to have time to establish his own financial independence, and she is paying him 46K a month in child support so it isn't like he will struggle - same as Costner's wife.

But the monthly amounts are not forever. Then what? Is she expected to save those amounts rather than spend them? Maybe. I'm not disagreeing that the prenup could hold. I just don't understand why she and Brandon Blackstock signed this rubbish. Lots of women are SAHM's for 20+ years and they have all the rights to an equal share of what was earned during the marriage by the working spouse. Why would someone agree to $1.3M?? That wasn't even that much 20 years ago! Were they drugged? I just don't get it.

In Christine's case, I believe Kevin is providing a house as well so she has minimal expenses she needs to cover. Her monthly amounts should go a long ways given her housing and all child related costs are covered (many times over). If she gets a job that covers the basics for herself and invests / spends the monthly amount wisely - she should be able to live quite nicely. Her lifestyle will take a hit for sure but that is the reality of divorce for many. I am sure they sign to show they are in it for love and not for the money. Christine has gotten to live a luxurious lifestyle of excess for almost 20 years that has been entirely provided for her, spending as she wished from the sounds of it. That is a massive benefit that most people don't get through marriage. Twenty years of being handed life on a plate and living like the rich and famous based solely on the work and effort of another is a pretty good ride.

He is not providing a house. He is providing a monthly rental allowance, which presumably will end at some point. The youngest child is what, 13? I'm guessing these monthly amounts will last 5 years at best. I'm not saying she hasn't lived a great life, but I don't think she has accumulated any assets and it sounds to me like she is about to be up a creek with no paddle.

+1. Five years of rent and then what for the next 20, 30, 40 years?

His behavior is awful. He is trying to force her to give up and stay with him.
He already has a bad reputation but this is pretty extreme. I can look at their situation and think it looks like money to someone like me and people whom do not have spouses worth 400 mil plus unlimited earning potential after. If she is not on par with him her kids suffer and he retains more power. Also for long marriages the idea that you are nothing is horrible. I am glad people
are calling him out. He is not used to no.
His last wife said no after he begged her to stay and promised he would change. He didn’t. Hope he gets his
act together. Maybe she would change her mind if he got therapy (who
goes public about spouses plastic surgery) and agreed to some sort
of post nuptial agreement that gives
her more power in finances. You know
like a married couple.

Nobody is calling him out except a few crazies on DCUM.

Unless she's been having an affair or been abusive in some significant way, it's not the way a man should treat the mother of his children. They are young teens and are being put through unnecessary drama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The articles say he was planning to file if she hadn’t done it first. Would she have gotten more if she had not tried to leave? I would never have signed that prenup. I would have signed A prenup, but not that one.

Signed,
SAHM who hasn’t worked in 16 years (with no prenup thankfully)

I don’t think the full prenup has been released. She’s challenging what she’s eligible for which may be based on specific terms.

He's claiming he owes her $1.3 or $1.4M plus the child support and monthly amount towards a rental home. I haven't read anything that says how long the rental allowance will go. Until the youngest child turns 18? Then what? Having 20 years of marriage and no meaningful assets to show for it is pretty terrible. Something in the prenup should have been tied to the length of the marriage, and which person initiated the divorce. Seems to me like she played her cards all wrong here - will be interesting to see what happens.

She could have amassed her own assets and she will have rights to any of the assets that she contributed to amassing during the marriage. They had a nanny and multiple household staff so it wasn't like she couldn't work. This prenup is very similar to Kelly Clarksons and hers was upheld by the court. She only needed to pay her exhusband 1.3 million (a pittance compared to her income of 1.9 million a month), and she evicted him from the property he was living in, and she kept all the houses and assets gained by her work during the marriage! She did have to pay him alimony of 100K a month for 18 months for him to have time to establish his own financial independence, and she is paying him 46K a month in child support so it isn't like he will struggle - same as Costner's wife.

But the monthly amounts are not forever. Then what? Is she expected to save those amounts rather than spend them? Maybe. I'm not disagreeing that the prenup could hold. I just don't understand why she and Brandon Blackstock signed this rubbish. Lots of women are SAHM's for 20+ years and they have all the rights to an equal share of what was earned during the marriage by the working spouse. Why would someone agree to $1.3M?? That wasn't even that much 20 years ago! Were they drugged? I just don't get it.

In Christine's case, I believe Kevin is providing a house as well so she has minimal expenses she needs to cover. Her monthly amounts should go a long ways given her housing and all child related costs are covered (many times over). If she gets a job that covers the basics for herself and invests / spends the monthly amount wisely - she should be able to live quite nicely. Her lifestyle will take a hit for sure but that is the reality of divorce for many. I am sure they sign to show they are in it for love and not for the money. Christine has gotten to live a luxurious lifestyle of excess for almost 20 years that has been entirely provided for her, spending as she wished from the sounds of it. That is a massive benefit that most people don't get through marriage. Twenty years of being handed life on a plate and living like the rich and famous based solely on the work and effort of another is a pretty good ride.

He is not providing a house. He is providing a monthly rental allowance, which presumably will end at some point. The youngest child is what, 13? I'm guessing these monthly amounts will last 5 years at best. I'm not saying she hasn't lived a great life, but I don't think she has accumulated any assets and it sounds to me like she is about to be up a creek with no paddle.

+1. Five years of rent and then what for the next 20, 30, 40 years?

His behavior is awful. He is trying to force her to give up and stay with him.
He already has a bad reputation but this is pretty extreme. I can look at their situation and think it looks like money to someone like me and people whom do not have spouses worth 400 mil plus unlimited earning potential after. If she is not on par with him her kids suffer and he retains more power. Also for long marriages the idea that you are nothing is horrible. I am glad people
are calling him out. He is not used to no.
His last wife said no after he begged her to stay and promised he would change. He didn’t. Hope he gets his
act together. Maybe she would change her mind if he got therapy (who
goes public about spouses plastic surgery) and agreed to some sort
of post nuptial agreement that gives
her more power in finances. You know
like a married couple.

Nobody is calling him out except a few crazies on DCUM.

Unless she's been having an affair or been abusive in some significant way, it's not the way a man should treat the mother of his children. They are young teens and are being put through unnecessary drama.

They are being put through unnecessary drama because of their mother’s behavior. Christine challenging the prenup has put her life and excessive spending on display. The children’s home and financial situation are not changing.