For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Showing posts with label Hollywood Divorce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hollywood Divorce. Show all posts
Divorce Parties
Divorce is not only the end of a marriage, but also the beginning of a new life, and for some people, even a cause for celebration. As I recently discussed here, some newly divorced or divorcing individuals have begun to mark the end of their marriages with some form or other of leisure travel.
Well, even if you prefer not to travel, you can celebrate your new status in a more public way right in your hometown: you can throw a divorce party for all your friends. Divorce parties are not new, as they have been going on for some time, but the ones I have known about have been relatively private, small, informal affairs. However, in Los Angeles at least, an industry has sprung up to cater to an apparently growing demand for divorce parties there. Maybe this is a trend that will catch on elsewhere.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Third Marriage for Paul McCartney, Third Divorce for Demi Moore
In recent celebrity news, Paul McCartney just got married again in London.
Meanwhile in Hollywood, Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher are apparently headed for divorce.
 |
| Wikipedia photo |
Stevie B, Owing $420K in Child Support, Arrested At Springfield Concert
According to the Springfield Republican, when Stevie B was apprehended as he was leaving the arena after his show, the arresting officer found him "cooperative but surprised by the arrest" and concerned "that he might miss a weekend gig in Providence, RI."
Stevie B is apparently now regularly residing and working in Vegas. Did he forget about the child support he skipped out on here in Massachusetts? Did he think he was in the clear by now?
Hmmm, reminds me of another music celebrity, Bobby Brown. He too was arrested several years back after returning to his native Massachusetts (from Georgia, in his case) to see his daughter cheerleading, and was hauled off to jail for huge back child support. One of the lessons I derived from this story, as I blogged back then, was:
If you happen to become a celebrity when you "grow up" and if you happen to get way behind on your child support, then do not go to visit your daughter as she is cheerleading in public.Perhaps I now should add to that:
...and do not perform a public concert in the very state, and in the nearest city, in which the ex to whom you owe massive child support happens to live.On this past Monday, October 3, TMZ reported that Stevie B was indeed arraigned on Monday, but still remained in custody until able to pay at least $10,000 of what he owes to get out of jail. The Associated Press more recently has reported that he got out of jail on Tuesday by paying $11,000, but Stevie B disputes the amount of the debt. More details, from the the AP story:
On Monday, he agreed to a schedule of payments for approximately $420,000 in child support, including a lump sum payment of $10,000 and weekly payments of $921. His lawyer said he paid an additional $1,000 with the required lump sum and has offered to pay an extra $500 per week.An extra $500 a week toward arrears would be just a tad less than what would be necessary just to pay the 6 percent annual interest that would be assessed on his $400K+ debt (to say nothing of the other 6 percent ordinarily assessed in penalties). I see more lump sum payments and possibly seizure of assets in Stevie B's future.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Madonna Divorce Settlement - It'll Be A Big "Payout" to Guy Ritchie
News was just released of the Madonna divorce settlement, under which Guy Ritchie will take around $76 Million as his part of the couple's marital assets division. For more, see the Guardian's report, Madonna divorce deal 'worth £50m' to husband Guy Ritchie | guardian.co.uk, and look at People Magazine's web story, Rep: Madonna to Pay Guy Ritchie $76 Million in Divorce Settlement - People.com.
This will be one of the biggest "payouts" in celebrity cases, and will probably be the biggest one going from a high-earning female star to her husband. Also, according to some reports, it is believed the two parents will share residence of their children. Apparently, there had been hope the divorce would be settled amicably, but that was not really the case, as John Bolch points out on his blog here: Family Lore: Not So Amicable.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
This will be one of the biggest "payouts" in celebrity cases, and will probably be the biggest one going from a high-earning female star to her husband. Also, according to some reports, it is believed the two parents will share residence of their children. Apparently, there had been hope the divorce would be settled amicably, but that was not really the case, as John Bolch points out on his blog here: Family Lore: Not So Amicable.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
YouTube Divorce - A Failed Strategy
To follow up on the YouTube Divorce of Tricia Walsh-Smith, which I discussed here this past April (after which Tricia continued her tirades and crazy antics on YouTube, all of which I ignored), it appears that Tricia's adventurous approach to fighting her contested divorce has not helped her one bit.
Back in April, I thought Tricia had the craziness out of her system, as she appeared to have gotten smart after her first YouTube video by hiring a good lawyer who would prevent her from using YouTube again. But I was wrong. She apparently either ignored good advice from her lawyers (most likely) or she didn't get any. Thus she persisted in smearing her husband in further YouTube videos.
Now the judge has found that Tricia conducted a "calculated and callous campaign to embarrass and humiliate her husband and his daughters." The judge both ordered her to leave the New York apartment from which she complained on the first video that her husband had tried to evict her, and also refused to void her prenuptial agreement as she had sought. See Family Lore: Walsh-Smith: "Calculated and callous" .
If you really feel like airing dirty laundry in public, you should consult a good lawyer first. But then you should follow that good lawyer's advice, even though the advice will almost always be: No, don't do it. Keep it private.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Back in April, I thought Tricia had the craziness out of her system, as she appeared to have gotten smart after her first YouTube video by hiring a good lawyer who would prevent her from using YouTube again. But I was wrong. She apparently either ignored good advice from her lawyers (most likely) or she didn't get any. Thus she persisted in smearing her husband in further YouTube videos.
Now the judge has found that Tricia conducted a "calculated and callous campaign to embarrass and humiliate her husband and his daughters." The judge both ordered her to leave the New York apartment from which she complained on the first video that her husband had tried to evict her, and also refused to void her prenuptial agreement as she had sought. See Family Lore: Walsh-Smith: "Calculated and callous" .
If you really feel like airing dirty laundry in public, you should consult a good lawyer first. But then you should follow that good lawyer's advice, even though the advice will almost always be: No, don't do it. Keep it private.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Christie Brinkley Divorce - Winner Takes All?
The Christie Brinkley divorce case has just been settled, and Christie will walk away with sole custody of the children and all but $2 million in cash, from assets estimated to be worth around $60 million, including 18 properties in the Hamptons, all of which she will keep. For more see the latest stories from People Magazine, and The New York Post.
Looks like Christie won big, after choosing to insist on a public trial. But as Dahlia Lithwick said at Slate.com last week("Le Trainwreck-The Christie Brinkley divorce is a lesson in how not to cure a broken heart" July 2, 2008, Slate.com), her win may have come at a big price. As Lithwick put it:
I'm not sure I completely buy her argument, but it's got some merit. I do think it is an open question how much kids really need to be sheltered from their parents' mistakes. And especially when they have been "raised in the media spotlight" how successful can we be in sheltering them? It may be that these children already knew most, if not all, of what was going on, and no further damage was done by the public airing of dad's dirty laundry. But there are those who would be in a position to know what was in the best interests of those children, including the lawyer for the children. Lithwick's best point is that the lawyer for the children wanted to close the trial, yet Christie insisted on going forward with her public trial.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Looks like Christie won big, after choosing to insist on a public trial. But as Dahlia Lithwick said at Slate.com last week("Le Trainwreck-The Christie Brinkley divorce is a lesson in how not to cure a broken heart" July 2, 2008, Slate.com), her win may have come at a big price. As Lithwick put it:
Brinkley is about to become another victim of the fiction that you can use the tabloids more efficiently than they can use you. Won't happen. Brinkley, Cook, and their two kids will get spit out the other end of this trial, and the only real winners will be the chesty adulteresses—each of whom will have her own reality show/recording contract/clothing label by the end of the summer. I have watched enough nasty custody battles to know that if you really want your children to know the unfiltered truth, you sit down with them (when they are 18 or 21) and tell it to them. You don't run it through the double noise machine of a four-week custody trial and the 24-hour tabloid press. Whatever it is about divorce that sets the parties to behaving like children..., it would be good of them to get out of the way of the real children—whose best interests are meant to be the polestar of any custody fight. If raising children in the media spotlight isn't its own form of child abuse, subjecting them to four weeks of Daddy's dirty laundry surely is. If you can name me one celebrity who won her celebrity divorce, I'll name you a kid who lost one.
I'm not sure I completely buy her argument, but it's got some merit. I do think it is an open question how much kids really need to be sheltered from their parents' mistakes. And especially when they have been "raised in the media spotlight" how successful can we be in sheltering them? It may be that these children already knew most, if not all, of what was going on, and no further damage was done by the public airing of dad's dirty laundry. But there are those who would be in a position to know what was in the best interests of those children, including the lawyer for the children. Lithwick's best point is that the lawyer for the children wanted to close the trial, yet Christie insisted on going forward with her public trial.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
NEW YORK POST ARTICLE EXCERPT:
....After an intense, all-night negotiation at a Long Island hotel, the pair agreed that she would get full custody of their two children, final parental decision-making power and ownership of the large number of properties they had amassed during their 10-year marriage.
In the end, all Cook ended up with was the cash - most of which will go to pay his legal expenses, sources said.
Brinkley agreed to pay him a flat amount of $2.1 million - a drop in the bucket when compared to her fortune, which a source close to her estimated to be around $60 million.
"It's to me a very bittersweet moment because it really is the death of a marriage. It's also a new start for all of us," Brinkley said after the settlement was announced in Suffolk County Court in Central Islip. "I'm very pleased with the results today. I was here fighting for custody."Following five bruising days in court, the two sides holed up at a Marriott in Islandia until the wee hours of the morning hammering out the final details of the settlement. They reached an agreement at 6:15 a.m.
A little more than three hours later, the 54-year-old stunner and her 49-year-old architect husband appeared in court to before Judge Mark Cohen to announce a deal.
....
Divorce By YouTube
Wow! Recently we had a disgruntled husband in Vermont airing dirty divorce laundry on his blog (see my posts here and there). Now a disgruntled wife in New York has broadcast her grievances on YouTube (see below). This YouTube video has been widely viewed, and has been widely reported and blogged about already. See Family Lore and New York Divorce Report for some good posts on this.
This YouTube woman, named Tricia, reminds me of Heather Mills in many ways. Tricia is the much younger wife of a wealthy man in a bitter divorce battle, and she happens to be English; furthermore, she appears to be somewhat unhinged, and judging from this video, she would probably make a very bad witness in court, just like Heather Mills apparently did.
But one difference is Heather Mills started out with lawyers, then bumbled about in an apparent, misguided attempt to try her case in the media, and finally ended up handling her case herself, while still running to the media to whine. But this YouTube woman appears first to have started out by trying her case on YouTube, but then now apparently has the good sense to have hired high-profile New York divorce attorney, Raoul Felder, who represents her now but not until after she made this video.
Now that's a better ordered approach, I'd say. Maybe Heather should have gotten it all out of her system with her crazy antics in public, if she had to, and then hired a good army of lawyers in London, and not the other way around.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
This YouTube woman, named Tricia, reminds me of Heather Mills in many ways. Tricia is the much younger wife of a wealthy man in a bitter divorce battle, and she happens to be English; furthermore, she appears to be somewhat unhinged, and judging from this video, she would probably make a very bad witness in court, just like Heather Mills apparently did.
But one difference is Heather Mills started out with lawyers, then bumbled about in an apparent, misguided attempt to try her case in the media, and finally ended up handling her case herself, while still running to the media to whine. But this YouTube woman appears first to have started out by trying her case on YouTube, but then now apparently has the good sense to have hired high-profile New York divorce attorney, Raoul Felder, who represents her now but not until after she made this video.
Now that's a better ordered approach, I'd say. Maybe Heather should have gotten it all out of her system with her crazy antics in public, if she had to, and then hired a good army of lawyers in London, and not the other way around.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Britney to Pay $400K to Various Lawyers
People Magazine reports that Britney Spears was just ordered to pay $400,000 to several lawyers working in various ways to manage the never-ending Britney Disaster.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Will Heather Mills Need A Dog?
If you still haven't gotten enough of the Paul McCartney-Heather Mills divorce story, or missed the recent news from here (long and short) and elsewhere, there are still more places to explore. (I'm sorry, I'm afflicted with Anglophilia, with a touch of Beatlemania, and Paul was my fave of the Fab Four. I do think this will be my last post on the topic - still, don't hold me to that.)
First Jeanne Hannah at Updates in Michigan Family Law has a great summary and analysis of the judgment, at least from where I sit on the American side of the Atlantic. Then, from over there where it's all happened, there's Family Law Week blog: Macca v Mucca, a list of, and links to, British family law blog posts on the topic. But that list seemed to miss the following English post, DivorceSolicitor: Heather Mills should buy a dog, which makes the rather amusing point that Heather may need a dog to keep her company now. The dog would give her unconditional love, Divorce Solicitor says, and that's something Heather may have a hard time finding right now. You know, money can't buy me love...
I find it interesting that nearly all of these recent commentaries I have been reading have failed to mention that Heather Mills does not have sole custody of four-year-old daughter Beatrice, as many people are likely to assume to be the case. Beatrice will instead be jointly parented by both Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills in a joint custody arrangement. I wonder if Heather Mills' previous public rants, including at least one in which she discussed her own suicidal thoughts, are the reason for this custody arrangement, which was apparently agreed upon before this past week's contested trial, as it was not obviously in contention then.
I for one think it is kind of cool that what is very likely to be the last child of a Beatle will grow up with parents in a joint custody arrangement. If Beatrice has to be a child of divorce, I think it is great she will at least get the benefit of having Sir Paul McCartney as a very active father in her life.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
First Jeanne Hannah at Updates in Michigan Family Law has a great summary and analysis of the judgment, at least from where I sit on the American side of the Atlantic. Then, from over there where it's all happened, there's Family Law Week blog: Macca v Mucca, a list of, and links to, British family law blog posts on the topic. But that list seemed to miss the following English post, DivorceSolicitor: Heather Mills should buy a dog, which makes the rather amusing point that Heather may need a dog to keep her company now. The dog would give her unconditional love, Divorce Solicitor says, and that's something Heather may have a hard time finding right now. You know, money can't buy me love...
I find it interesting that nearly all of these recent commentaries I have been reading have failed to mention that Heather Mills does not have sole custody of four-year-old daughter Beatrice, as many people are likely to assume to be the case. Beatrice will instead be jointly parented by both Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills in a joint custody arrangement. I wonder if Heather Mills' previous public rants, including at least one in which she discussed her own suicidal thoughts, are the reason for this custody arrangement, which was apparently agreed upon before this past week's contested trial, as it was not obviously in contention then.
I for one think it is kind of cool that what is very likely to be the last child of a Beatle will grow up with parents in a joint custody arrangement. If Beatrice has to be a child of divorce, I think it is great she will at least get the benefit of having Sir Paul McCartney as a very active father in her life.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Mills McCartney Judgment Now Published in Full
As just reported by the British family law blog Pink Tape (Mills McCartney Award Announced - and Judgment published in full « Pink Tape), the McCartney-Mills divorce judgment has now been published in full, after Heather Mills' application for leave to appeal (in order precisely to prevent the entire judgment from being published) was denied. The entire judgment can be found here. See the video below, showing Heather Mills' comments to the media immediately upon leaving court yesterday, and before the full judgment was published after she lost her appeal this morning. Then read the comments from the Pink Tape blog by British barrister Lucy Reed at the end of this post.
Heather here alternates between, on the one hand, trying to convince us she is quite satisfied with the judgment, and on the other hand, criticizing the court system, the "club" of lawyers she faced, and the judge, all of whom were against her but begrudgingly gave her significant assets only because they had to. But she went back and forth, and couldn't consistently hide her displeasure. At one point she even complained that the (presumably inadequate) 35,000 pounds per year for support or maintenance she will get for daughter Beatrice (this 35,000 pounds, or roughly $70,000 a year, does not include the nanny and school fees, which also must be paid by Paul) will mean Beatrice will have to travel "B Class" while her father travels "A Class." Blah, blah, blah...
Heather said she wanted to appeal the publication of the entire judgment and first said something vague about how she was afraid publication of the entire judgment would be done in a way designed to make her look like she had been unsuccessful. But then, after somebody (her sister?) said something in her ear, Heather then explained that she was appealing the publication of the entire judgment for reasons of privacy, on account of her daughter. Oh, but, yes, I'm satisfied with the terms of the judgment itself, and I'm not appealing that, Heather kept stating.
Hmmm...Well, did you think you did well, Heather, or not?
Now that I have quickly read the judgment, I think I know why she didn't want it published, and I don't think it has anything to do with privacy for her daughter. The judge seems to describe Heather herself, and her evidence, as less than credible. Well, if she performed in court the way she spoke to the media here, I can see why the court found as it did.
Heather probably should have forked over the six hundred thousand pounds she says her former law firm wanted from her to represent her at the six-day hearing, rather than go it alone, as she did, and as she unconvincingly urges others to do. Perhaps she would then have been able to convince the court Paul McCartney is worth eight-hundred million pounds, rather than just four hundred million, and perhaps her other evidence would have seemed more believable. Maybe she would have walked away with many millions more, and wouldn't now be complaining about her daughter's having to travel B Class. Who knows? Anyway, this is fascinating stuff.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Heather here alternates between, on the one hand, trying to convince us she is quite satisfied with the judgment, and on the other hand, criticizing the court system, the "club" of lawyers she faced, and the judge, all of whom were against her but begrudgingly gave her significant assets only because they had to. But she went back and forth, and couldn't consistently hide her displeasure. At one point she even complained that the (presumably inadequate) 35,000 pounds per year for support or maintenance she will get for daughter Beatrice (this 35,000 pounds, or roughly $70,000 a year, does not include the nanny and school fees, which also must be paid by Paul) will mean Beatrice will have to travel "B Class" while her father travels "A Class." Blah, blah, blah...
Heather said she wanted to appeal the publication of the entire judgment and first said something vague about how she was afraid publication of the entire judgment would be done in a way designed to make her look like she had been unsuccessful. But then, after somebody (her sister?) said something in her ear, Heather then explained that she was appealing the publication of the entire judgment for reasons of privacy, on account of her daughter. Oh, but, yes, I'm satisfied with the terms of the judgment itself, and I'm not appealing that, Heather kept stating.
Hmmm...Well, did you think you did well, Heather, or not?
Now that I have quickly read the judgment, I think I know why she didn't want it published, and I don't think it has anything to do with privacy for her daughter. The judge seems to describe Heather herself, and her evidence, as less than credible. Well, if she performed in court the way she spoke to the media here, I can see why the court found as it did.
Heather probably should have forked over the six hundred thousand pounds she says her former law firm wanted from her to represent her at the six-day hearing, rather than go it alone, as she did, and as she unconvincingly urges others to do. Perhaps she would then have been able to convince the court Paul McCartney is worth eight-hundred million pounds, rather than just four hundred million, and perhaps her other evidence would have seemed more believable. Maybe she would have walked away with many millions more, and wouldn't now be complaining about her daughter's having to travel B Class. Who knows? Anyway, this is fascinating stuff.
EXCERPTS FROM THE PINK TAPE BLOG:
"UPDATE: lunchtime Tues. Heather Mills McCartney’s application for leave to appeal has been rejected by a 2 judge Court of Appeal. The judgment has been published in full - I have not had time to read it as I have to rush out and deal with more pressing matters (yes such things do exist), but you can find the pdf document here. All I can tell you (and make of this what you will) is that the word ‘unreasonable’ appears 16 times, ‘conduct’ a staggering 108, ‘contribution’ 19 times, ‘exaggerated’ 5 times, and ‘ridiculous’ once. ‘Husband’s case’ appears 8 times, whilst ‘wife’s case’ appears 20 - perhaps an indicator of a certain amount of judicial appeal-proofing going on? ‘evidence’ raises 76 hits, the one which caught my eye being at pa 16 where Heather’s evidence is described as inconsistent, inaccurate, less than candid and Heather as a less than impressive witness. Oops."
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Britney Spears Ordered to Pay $375K of K-Fed's Legal Fees
Following up on my previous post about lawyers for Britney Spears and Kevin Federline arguing in court over whether, and how much, Britney should pay for K-Fed's legal fees in their ongoing custody battle, I now pass on the news that the California court commissioner on the case yesterday decided that Spears Must Pay $375,000 for K-Fed Fees, according to the Associated Press ("Britney Spears was ordered by a court commissioner Monday to pay ex-husband Kevin Federline $375,000 to cover his attorney fees in their child-custody dispute. Mark Vincent Kaplan, Federline's lead attorney, had asked for nearly $500,000.")
For Britney, who is (was?) worth about $100 million, this is just a drop in the bucket. Britney had, however, apparently otherwise been spending her money like there's no tomorrow. But now she is temporarily on a court-ordered $1500/week allowance. Meanwhile her "poor" family may not always be able to depend upon her for money, and indeed Life and Style Magazine even now reports "the Spears family is going broke," whatever that means. (Sorry, but the full article is not available through this online link, so you'll just have to read it in the check-out line - or airport bookstore, as I did this past weekend. I don't remember all the details, but I seem to remember, for one thing, that Brit's mom was spotted trying to sell jewelry.)
Brit needs to get better and get back to some high-paying work so she can pay her many expenses, including her child support, and what we might call her "extended family support," without continuing to reduce her millions in assets. Otherwise, at this rate, Britney and her dependent family might be down to, say, the meager sum of $50 million or so Heather Mills just got from Paul McCartney. So sad.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
For Britney, who is (was?) worth about $100 million, this is just a drop in the bucket. Britney had, however, apparently otherwise been spending her money like there's no tomorrow. But now she is temporarily on a court-ordered $1500/week allowance. Meanwhile her "poor" family may not always be able to depend upon her for money, and indeed Life and Style Magazine even now reports "the Spears family is going broke," whatever that means. (Sorry, but the full article is not available through this online link, so you'll just have to read it in the check-out line - or airport bookstore, as I did this past weekend. I don't remember all the details, but I seem to remember, for one thing, that Brit's mom was spotted trying to sell jewelry.)
Brit needs to get better and get back to some high-paying work so she can pay her many expenses, including her child support, and what we might call her "extended family support," without continuing to reduce her millions in assets. Otherwise, at this rate, Britney and her dependent family might be down to, say, the meager sum of $50 million or so Heather Mills just got from Paul McCartney. So sad.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Heather Mills to Get £24.3 Million in Assets
Heather Mills will get £24.3 million in assets (approximately 50 million U.S. dollars), per judgment in her divorce with Paul McCartney. See Family Lore: Money (That's What I Want), and The Times article of today. This judgment may not be the end of the matter, however.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Lawyers for Britney and Kevin Rack Up More Fees Arguing About Who Has To Pay Them
In Hollywood News, this past weekend Britney's ex Kevin Federline played golf with Britney's dad Jamie, and then on Monday (yesterday), Britney Spears and Kevin Federline's lawyers argued again in court about who has to pay K-Fed's legal fees in their ongoing custody case.
It's not fair that K-Fed's lawyers are increasing their rate to $600/hour, says Britney's $700/hour lawyer. Blah, blah, blah....Meanwhile, Britney apparently continues to be Britney, so there's no doubt the money will keep coming to these, and other, lawyers.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
It's not fair that K-Fed's lawyers are increasing their rate to $600/hour, says Britney's $700/hour lawyer. Blah, blah, blah....Meanwhile, Britney apparently continues to be Britney, so there's no doubt the money will keep coming to these, and other, lawyers.
Britney's Lawyer Questions K-Fed's Spending - Kevin Federline : People.com: ("Britney's Lawyer Questions K-Fed's Spending," By Howard Breuer, Monday March 10, 2008):
"Kevin Federline can afford to 'take responsibility' for some of his own legal fees, an attorney for Britney Spears said in court Monday.
The pop star's lawyer, Stacy Phillips, asked Federline to contribute to his own legal bills in the former couple's ongoing custody case. Citing Federline's tip of $2,000 on a recent $365 dining tab, Phillips contended that Federline can afford to help pay 'for the diligent work being done on his behalf.'
Currently Spears is responsible for paying her ex-husband's legal fees, including $405,000 owed to Federline's attorney Mark Vincent Kaplan.
Phillips further argued that it was inappropriate for Kaplan and his partner to have increased their hourly rate to $600 an hour. Kaplan countered that Phillips charges $700 an hour."
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Bobby Brown - Do We Want Him Here or Not?
As just reported here in Boston - see Boston Globe: Bobby Brown agrees to community service and Boston Criminal Lawyer Blog: Singer Bobby Brown Forgoes Jail Time for Community Service Over Alleged Cocaine Possession - Bobby Brown will now do community service here after being arrested for alleged drug possession, per the terms of disposition in a Brockton District Court criminal matter.
Wait a minute. Didn't the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, just a year and a half ago, issue an order for his arrest if he comes back into this state?
Yes, in fact it did. See the People magazine article, Bobby Brown Warned Over Child Support - People.com: ("A judge in Massachusetts added to Bobby Brown's troubles on Monday, ordering him arrested if he steps foot in the state, after Brown skipped a court hearing over delinquent child-support payments to Kim Ward, the mother of two of his children....")
Anyone who has followed the story of Bobby Brown will likely have the impression that, over the last several years, every time Bobby has set foot in this state he has been in one of the following places: 1) in Attleboro or somewhere nearby watching his teenage daughter at cheerleading events, 2) in family court in Canton facing the music for failure to keep up with the child support and other obligations to that very daughter and her brother (children he had before he hooked up with Whitney Houston), 3) in jail because of that failure, or 4) in transit between those other places, courtesy of law enforcement. (To complete the picture, I think Bobby Brown has also been stopped at least once by police for other minor vehicle infractions, and went to a hospital for a false heart attack alarm, but there are just way too many stories to cite them all here. If interested, just do a search for Bobby Brown at people.com or tmz.com.)
Really, Massachusetts needs to decide whether it wants Bobby Brown back here or not. Maybe the family court department should talk with the district court department and get on the same page here, or perhaps we should just have a referendum and let the voters decide whether we want him back here.
Anyway, this guy's problems up here seem to have escalated at the same time his relationship soured with his famous former wife Whitney Houston, with whom he had lived down in Georgia, and especially after she recently called it splits with him and got her divorce in California. In that divorce case, at least according to the press, Whitney pretty much took him to the cleaners. (On the Whitney Houston-Bobby Brown story, see Bobby Brown's Attempt to Overturn Divorce Denied - Bobby Brown, Whitney Houston : People.com.)
For now at least, Bobby Brown must do community service here in Massachusetts. And get this: he will be mentoring youth as part of his community service, and that's something he apparently wants to do, according to his attorney.
I found that fact interesting, especially after reading Bobby Brown and Brainiac at 40 - The Boston Globe from his former classmate Joshua Glenn over at the Boston Globe (this piece is from October of last year). Joshua Glenn is just about the same age, and says he and Bobby Brown attended the same elementary school together in Boston. Although Glenn admits he didn't really know Brown, he does remember that Bobby Brown stole his calculator. Glenn also was kind enough to remind us of some of Brown's infamous rap lyrics:
And that brings me to this question:
What exactly will Bobby Brown be teaching our youth in Massachusetts, through this court-ordered community service?
I have some lessons that Bobby Brown can teach them. There are just a few I can print here, and these ones are just specifically for those youth who hope to some day be a celebrity like Bobby Brown: 1) If you happen to become a celebrity when you "grow up" and if you happen to get way behind on your child support, then do not go to visit your daughter as she is cheerleading in public. 2) Do not steal calculators from classmates, because even if you don't end up in juvie, your classmates may grow up to be writers for your hometown newspaper.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
Wait a minute. Didn't the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court, just a year and a half ago, issue an order for his arrest if he comes back into this state?
Yes, in fact it did. See the People magazine article, Bobby Brown Warned Over Child Support - People.com: ("A judge in Massachusetts added to Bobby Brown's troubles on Monday, ordering him arrested if he steps foot in the state, after Brown skipped a court hearing over delinquent child-support payments to Kim Ward, the mother of two of his children....")
Anyone who has followed the story of Bobby Brown will likely have the impression that, over the last several years, every time Bobby has set foot in this state he has been in one of the following places: 1) in Attleboro or somewhere nearby watching his teenage daughter at cheerleading events, 2) in family court in Canton facing the music for failure to keep up with the child support and other obligations to that very daughter and her brother (children he had before he hooked up with Whitney Houston), 3) in jail because of that failure, or 4) in transit between those other places, courtesy of law enforcement. (To complete the picture, I think Bobby Brown has also been stopped at least once by police for other minor vehicle infractions, and went to a hospital for a false heart attack alarm, but there are just way too many stories to cite them all here. If interested, just do a search for Bobby Brown at people.com or tmz.com.)
Really, Massachusetts needs to decide whether it wants Bobby Brown back here or not. Maybe the family court department should talk with the district court department and get on the same page here, or perhaps we should just have a referendum and let the voters decide whether we want him back here.
Anyway, this guy's problems up here seem to have escalated at the same time his relationship soured with his famous former wife Whitney Houston, with whom he had lived down in Georgia, and especially after she recently called it splits with him and got her divorce in California. In that divorce case, at least according to the press, Whitney pretty much took him to the cleaners. (On the Whitney Houston-Bobby Brown story, see Bobby Brown's Attempt to Overturn Divorce Denied - Bobby Brown, Whitney Houston : People.com.)
For now at least, Bobby Brown must do community service here in Massachusetts. And get this: he will be mentoring youth as part of his community service, and that's something he apparently wants to do, according to his attorney.
I found that fact interesting, especially after reading Bobby Brown and Brainiac at 40 - The Boston Globe from his former classmate Joshua Glenn over at the Boston Globe (this piece is from October of last year). Joshua Glenn is just about the same age, and says he and Bobby Brown attended the same elementary school together in Boston. Although Glenn admits he didn't really know Brown, he does remember that Bobby Brown stole his calculator. Glenn also was kind enough to remind us of some of Brown's infamous rap lyrics:
Too hot to handle, too cold to hold
They're called the Ghostbusters and they're in control
Had 'em throwin' a party for a bunch of children
While all the while the slime was under the building
So they packed up their group, got a grip, came equipped
Grabbed their proton packs off their back and they split
Found about Vigo, the master of evil
Try to battle my boys? That's not legal!
And that brings me to this question:
What exactly will Bobby Brown be teaching our youth in Massachusetts, through this court-ordered community service?
I have some lessons that Bobby Brown can teach them. There are just a few I can print here, and these ones are just specifically for those youth who hope to some day be a celebrity like Bobby Brown: 1) If you happen to become a celebrity when you "grow up" and if you happen to get way behind on your child support, then do not go to visit your daughter as she is cheerleading in public. 2) Do not steal calculators from classmates, because even if you don't end up in juvie, your classmates may grow up to be writers for your hometown newspaper.
From the Associated Press:
BROCKTON, Mass.—Singer Bobby Brown will not face criminal charges after police said they found a small amount of cocaine in his possession.
Brown's attorney said Tuesday a Brockton District Court clerk magistrate found no probable cause to issue a criminal complaint, but recommended that Brown volunteer to mentor young people, which Brown wanted to do anyway.
Brown agreed to a year's community service and his attorney said if no other issues arise over the next year, the matter will be struck from the docket.
The case began when police responding to a disturbance at a Brockton hotel on Dec. 1. They said they found the 39-year-old Brown sitting in an SUV in the parking lot, with cocaine in his possession.
The Boston native is the former husband of singer Whitney Houston and stars in the CMT Network show "Gone Country."
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
McCartney Chainsaw Massacre
Thanks again to English family lawyer John Bolch and his Family Lore blog, for helping us here on the other side of the Atlantic to keep up with the ever-fascinating McCartney-Mills divorce.
In his recent post Family Lore: The Bishop, the Beatle and the Beards, Bolch points to another wonderful English family law attorney and blogger, Marilyn Stowe, whose Marilyn Stowe Family Law and Divorce Blog describes the horror show that is in store for Heather Mills when she goes it alone to her final divorce hearing to face Sir Paul McCartney and his dream team.
Marilyn Stowe says if there were ever to be a film about the court proceedings, it might be called the "McCartney Chainsaw Massacre, with Heather Mills as the victim." If you're foolishly considering representing yourself in a high-stakes divorce, perhaps you should first read Marilyn Stowe's entire, vividly descriptive post Heather Mills minus the divorce lawyer, and not just my excerpts from it, below. (By the way, I'm finding these British family law bloggers are just way more creative and better writers than we are over here in America. I'll probably have to keep adding more of them to my blogroll.)
In his recent post Family Lore: The Bishop, the Beatle and the Beards, Bolch points to another wonderful English family law attorney and blogger, Marilyn Stowe, whose Marilyn Stowe Family Law and Divorce Blog describes the horror show that is in store for Heather Mills when she goes it alone to her final divorce hearing to face Sir Paul McCartney and his dream team.
Marilyn Stowe says if there were ever to be a film about the court proceedings, it might be called the "McCartney Chainsaw Massacre, with Heather Mills as the victim." If you're foolishly considering representing yourself in a high-stakes divorce, perhaps you should first read Marilyn Stowe's entire, vividly descriptive post Heather Mills minus the divorce lawyer, and not just my excerpts from it, below. (By the way, I'm finding these British family law bloggers are just way more creative and better writers than we are over here in America. I'll probably have to keep adding more of them to my blogroll.)
"When Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills face one another other in court next week, Sir Paul will be flanked by some of the country’s toughest lawyers. Ms. Mills, meanwhile, has elected to represent herself. To my way of thinking, having represented a client in a similar scenario only last week in London’s High Court, to go into court unrepresented is as foolhardy as anyone could ever imagine.
For those unfamiliar with the facilities at the Royal Courts of Justice, let me describe the atmosphere in the sombre courtroom. Until a final deal is signed and approved by the Court, a fully fought contest could yet take place. Even an agreement reached 'in principle' does not guarantee a done deal - and could still break down.
The courtroom is imposing. The High Court judge, Mr Justice Bennett, will sit on a raised dais, without robes or wig. Ranks of lawyers will be seated opposite him. The formidable Queen’s Counsel Nicholas Mostyn, who pulls no punches - he once fearlessly cross-examined an entire opposing team of lawyers, including one by video link while she holidayed in Japan - will sit on the front row. I do not expect him to spare Heather Mills. Behind them will be the barristers and solicitors.
The junior lawyers assisting with the case will bring up the rear. Teetering piles of files, all numbered and paginated, will be stacked on the desks. Individual sets will be placed before the judge, every one of the lawyers and both parties involved. Microphones will be suspended from the ceiling, for an accurate taped record of the hearing. The air will be cold; the atmosphere will be tense and thunderous.
When Heather Mills steps into this courtroom, she will face her husband, this menacing phalanx of lawyers ranged against her, and the judge - who will, I expect, keep the proceedings strictly private. It is only then, I suspect, that she will begin to realise what she is in for. In this courtroom, there will be no prisoners and if an agreement is to be made into a final order, she will be expected to sign up to a draconian agreement drafted by Sir Paul’s lawyers....
....
Admittedly, Ms. Mills’ experiences representing herself in court, up against her idolised husband and the pillars of the legal establishment, could have all the makings of a great film. She could even play herself as the heroine. However, I fear that single-handed battle in the High Court is a labour for which she is ill-qualified. Even if she does settle, she could succumb to an unbalanced deal that she will regret for the rest of her life. With this in mind, a movie version may end up resembling the McCartney Chainsaw Massacre - with Heather Mills as the victim."
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the divorce and family law page of my law firm website.
McCartney v. Mills & Mills v. Her Lawyers
Check out the Family Lore blog's recent post on the McCartney-Mills divorce: Pools of Sorrow, Waves of Joy. Apparently the McCartney-Mills divorce saga has still not ended with an agreement between Paul and Heather. In fact, it seems Paul and Heather may be going to court next week for a five-day hearing to resolve their divorce, and in that important proceeding Heather may continue to be without a lawyer after she and her longtime law firm parted ways. Also, apparently her former solicitors are claiming she owes them up to two million pounds for legal representation in her divorce, but she may in turn be suing them. For more, see Lady McCartney 'set to sue divorce lawyers' - Telegraph.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.
Shaq O'Neal Divorce Reveals He's A Big Spender
I just saw this post by Jeffrey Lalloway at the California Divorce and Family Law Blog: Shaq's Expenses Revealed In Divorce Court...$26,560 a month in babysitters??.
Miami Heat center Shaq O'Neal, in the middle of a divorce with his wife of five years, Shaunie, has reported expenses of $1.3 million a month, including $26,560 per month just for babysitters (Shaq and Shaunie have four kids together and two kids of previous relationships), according to the blog which cites the following Miami CBS4 report: cbs4.com - Shaq's Expenses Revealed In Divorce Court.
Here's the complete list of O'Neal's monthly expenses, as reported in the CBS4 article and in the California Divorce and Family Law Blog:
• $156,116 on mortgages.
• $110,505 on vacations.
• $60,417 on gifts.
• $26,560 on baby-sitters.
• $24,300 on gasoline.
• $22,190 on maids.
• $17,220 on clothes.
• $12,775 on food.
And the tax man gets about $500,000 a month in income taxes.
At that rate of spending, and even with Shaq's $20 million yearly income (an income second among NBA players only to our own Kevin Garnett of the Boston Celtics) there doesn't seem to be enough room in his budget for savings and investment. I've heard it said about us Americans that the answer to the question "What is your cost of living?" is exactly the same as the answer to the question "How much do you make?" Certainly seems to be true for Shaq.
At that rate of spending, he only has about $4 million left each year to invest or save (not including that which he saves through his mortgage payments).
Aren't you feeling sorry for him now?
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the Massachusetts Divorce & Family Law Page of my law firm website.
Miami Heat center Shaq O'Neal, in the middle of a divorce with his wife of five years, Shaunie, has reported expenses of $1.3 million a month, including $26,560 per month just for babysitters (Shaq and Shaunie have four kids together and two kids of previous relationships), according to the blog which cites the following Miami CBS4 report: cbs4.com - Shaq's Expenses Revealed In Divorce Court.
Here's the complete list of O'Neal's monthly expenses, as reported in the CBS4 article and in the California Divorce and Family Law Blog:
• $156,116 on mortgages.
• $110,505 on vacations.
• $60,417 on gifts.
• $26,560 on baby-sitters.
• $24,300 on gasoline.
• $22,190 on maids.
• $17,220 on clothes.
• $12,775 on food.
And the tax man gets about $500,000 a month in income taxes.
At that rate of spending, and even with Shaq's $20 million yearly income (an income second among NBA players only to our own Kevin Garnett of the Boston Celtics) there doesn't seem to be enough room in his budget for savings and investment. I've heard it said about us Americans that the answer to the question "What is your cost of living?" is exactly the same as the answer to the question "How much do you make?" Certainly seems to be true for Shaq.
At that rate of spending, he only has about $4 million left each year to invest or save (not including that which he saves through his mortgage payments).
Aren't you feeling sorry for him now?
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see the Massachusetts Divorce & Family Law Page of my law firm website.
Still No Visitation For Brit After Today's Hearing
See the Court's Order (courtesy of TMZ.com) after today's hearing in the Britney Spears custody case. Kevin Federline and several witnesses testified, but Britney didn't see fit even to show up to court until the afternoon. Result of the hearing? Still no visitation at all for Brit with the kids until at least February 19.
TMZ.com: "No Visitation for Brit," Posted Jan 14th 2008:
"The Commissioner has just ruled that Britney will not have visitation restored, at least until the next hearing on February 19.
The order came after the testimony of several people, including two LAPD cops who responded to the craziness a week ago Thursday; Lisa Hacker, a parenting coach; Lonnie Jones, a bodyguard, and Pamela Strong, the court monitor who was present during the drama. K-Fed's attorney, Mark Vincent Kaplan, testified as well.
Story developing ..."
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see my law firm website's divorce and family law page.
TMZ.com: "No Visitation for Brit," Posted Jan 14th 2008:
"The Commissioner has just ruled that Britney will not have visitation restored, at least until the next hearing on February 19.
The order came after the testimony of several people, including two LAPD cops who responded to the craziness a week ago Thursday; Lisa Hacker, a parenting coach; Lonnie Jones, a bodyguard, and Pamela Strong, the court monitor who was present during the drama. K-Fed's attorney, Mark Vincent Kaplan, testified as well.
Story developing ..."
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see my law firm website's divorce and family law page.
Joanna Grossman on What Britney Spears Can Teach Us About Family Law
I said in a recent post that we should not apply the legal lessons of the celebrities and the wealthy to our own cases, unless we are ourselves from that "strange world of the rich and famous, where fame sometimes hurts, but money always helps."
But there are of course some things we can indeed learn from these cases, and in fact that is part of my reason for writing about them.
When celebrities live large, their large mistakes can be especially illuminating. Family Law Professor Joanna Grossman explains, in her article posted today on Findlaw's Writ, what Britney Spears in particular can teach us about family law: FindLaw's Writ - By Joanna Grossman, January 8, 2008: "Britney Spears - Why She Lost Visitation Rights, And What Her Case Teaches Us About Family Law"
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.
But there are of course some things we can indeed learn from these cases, and in fact that is part of my reason for writing about them.
When celebrities live large, their large mistakes can be especially illuminating. Family Law Professor Joanna Grossman explains, in her article posted today on Findlaw's Writ, what Britney Spears in particular can teach us about family law: FindLaw's Writ - By Joanna Grossman, January 8, 2008: "Britney Spears - Why She Lost Visitation Rights, And What Her Case Teaches Us About Family Law"
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.
Britney's Visitation Suspended - Physical and Legal Custody to K-Fed Until Further Order of Court
Order in Brit Case -- Visitation Suspended - TMZ.com: "Order in Brit Case -- Visitation Suspended" (Jan 4th 2008 6:07PM by TMZ Staff)
"The Commish in the Brit case just issued his order and we got it first. -- K-Fed gets sole legal and physical custody. Brit gets nothing."
See the article to see TMZ.com's copy of the court order: No custody or visitation for Britney until further order of court...Way to go, Britney.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.
"The Commish in the Brit case just issued his order and we got it first. -- K-Fed gets sole legal and physical custody. Brit gets nothing."
See the article to see TMZ.com's copy of the court order: No custody or visitation for Britney until further order of court...Way to go, Britney.
For information about Massachusetts divorce and family law, see Law Offices of Steven Ballard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)