Bethenny & Jason: The Divorce Showdown

[zoeysmom]

Well, I am open to hear logical theories about the pre-nup.

 

I mean, the point of a prenup is to keep the assets of one partner protected. So here are my theories.

 

1. Jason wants more than what he agreed to, for whatever reason. This is, I suspect, the reason 99 percent of all pre-nups get challeneged, the partner who is getting less wants more due to whatever reason they think changes the pre-nup.  

 

So if Jason isn't the problem - and the "we don't know WHY this is happening, we don't know what is in the pre-nup" idea is basically happening to get Jason off the hook from being the guy who signed a pre-nup and now wants more.... well, what is the other choice?

 

2. Bethenny wants to pay Jason LESS than what she agreed to in the pre-nup. Really, I've never heard of this happening but ok. I find it hard to believe that this has never ever been suggested even in rumor, that the entire divorce drama is over Bethenny wanting to take away even what the pre-nup said.

 

Does anyone have a logical third or fourth option as to why they're arguing over the prenup terms?

For number # 3 pick concealment.

 

I was trying for a #4 and I ran across this:

http://www.18884mydivorce.com/defending-attacking-prenup-agreement/''

 

Oh I forgot the most important one, promises made after the agreement was entered into. 

Edited June 19, 2015 by zoeysmom

[ZoloftBlob]

Concealment? I'm intrigued. What do you mean?

[zoeysmom]

Concealment? I'm intrigued. What do you mean?

Concealment of assets, pending business deals, partnerships, tax liens,lawsuits, children from other relationships mental illness, congenital health problems.  This a general definition.

[Crikey]

I know a woman whose husband decided to file for divorce.  Before he did he took money out of their accounts, hid all her jewelry and sold some assets.  He then served her with papers.  Many business folks hide/conceal assets before filing. 

Not saying Bethy did any of that, just that kind of stuff happens and lawyers/judges are left to sort out the mess.

 

Footnote about the woman I know:  She saw her ex's daughter wearing some of the stolen/hidden jewelry in a recent photo.

[Celia Rubenstein]

From what I have read, a judge ordering joint legal custody after going through an entire trial is almost unheard of.

 

This is not true at all.  Proving a parent is not fit for any legal custody at all takes a huge burden of proof.  Just because it went to trial does not mean that it is likely that it would rule for one parent.  If this were true, everyone would do a trial.  The default is for it to be joint.  

 

Well-established New York state case law says otherwise. 

 

Will the Court order joint legal custody if both parties do not agree to it? Usually, they will not. The leading case in New York on this issue is Braiman v. Braiman 44 NY2d.5884; 407 NYS2d 449 (1978) Braiman states that where the parties are embattled or hostile toward each other, and if they are unable to work together to make joint decisions, then the courts will not order it. In the rare instances where the Court has ordered joint legal custody without the agreement of the parties, the Appellate Courts have overturned it. (Citing Braiman v. Braiman)

 

 

http://www.sarilaw.com/Articles/Custody_and_Visitation/Does_sole_custody_prevent.aspx

[ZoloftBlob]

Concealment of assets, pending business deals, partnerships, tax liens,lawsuits, children from other relationships mental illness, congenital health problems.  This a general definition.

 

Doesn't this fall under Jason wanting more than he initially agreed to due to changing circumstances?

 

Also your link, zoeysmom appears to be a blocked site - there's a big block covering the article.

Edited June 19, 2015 by ZoloftBlob

[shoegal]

I thought she was too and then hereis this article:  http://www.allabouttrh.com/andy-cohen-its-ridiculous-that-bethenny-frankel-blames-me-for-her-marriage-to-jason-hoppy/

 

Interesting Andy believed the two be very much I love.  Maybe it was the constant "I love yous," on camera or the vows.  That now makes two men in Bethenny's life that felt she was very much in love with Jason.  Perhaps Bethenny should stop second guessing herself

I don't think Bethenny has ever said she never loved Jason. Has she?

[Crikey]

Bethy did an interview in 2011 with Billy Bush.  It is on YouTube.

 

BB : Is Jason rich on his own?  Do you have a prenup?

B:    Jason is not wealthy on his own, he's, he's a regular guy.

BB   Does he get half of Skinny Girl if something......  (here, Bethy starts rearranging her hair, looked very uncomfortable)

B     You know , we don't even talk about it but, yeah, no, it is all ours.........we don't spend any money, I saw a purse.....

 

She also mentions that Billy advised her to not go back on RHONY after her Bethy shows end and that she would like another child, another girl.  

[Rainny]

Bethy did an interview in 2011 with Billy Bush.  It is on YouTube.

 

BB : Is Jason rich on his own?  Do you have a prenup?

B:    Jason is not wealthy on his own, he's, he's a regular guy.

BB   Does he get half of Skinny Girl if something......  (here, Bethy starts rearranging her hair, looked very uncomfortable)

B     You know , we don't even talk about it but, yeah, no, it is all ours.........we don't spend any money, I saw a purse.....

 

She also mentions that Billy advised her to not go back on RHONY after her Bethy shows end and that she would like another child, another girl.  

I watched this interview just now, up until the part she asks Billy what he would spend money on. I have to say, I don't dislike Bethenny but I don't like her either. I go back and forth with her all the time. This interview she loses me. She says in the interview she always goes with her gut because she never assumes that other people are smarter than she is. This was in 2011. Now she is telling us she didn't go with her gut and she let other people convince her to marry Jason. 

 

I think at the very least Bethenny and Jason used each other if they weren't really in love enough to get married. Now they are both suffering for it. But, so is their child and that is the worst part. 

[Mrs peel]

From what I have read, a judge ordering joint legal custody after going through an entire trial is almost unheard of. This is because if the parties were able to work together at all, a full trial would not have been necessary in the first place. So to avoid the parties being back before the judge almost immediately because they can't work together, the judge typically makes the call that one person has all the legal control.

This is not true at all.  Proving a parent is not fit for any legal custody at all takes a huge burden of proof.  Just because it went to trial does not mean that it is likely that it would rule for one parent.  If this were true, everyone would do a trial.  The default is for it to be joint.  You have to prove the person is seriously not capable.  She was not able to do that.  Judges see this all the time and they know people get petty and vindictive.  They look at hot dog stuff and say grow up, you're being silly.  It wasn't enough.  If he was signing Bryn up for medical research studies against B's wishes OK then she would have a case, but no.

First, apparently in NY there is no “default” for joint custody.  And it is typical that, after a completed trial, a judge does NOT grant joint custody.  Joint custody is all about making joint decisions for the child, and if the parents are unable to agree on custody/divorce to the point that they take it to trial (and remember that almost all cases settle before trial), it’s almost “per se” that they can’t get along well enough to make those joint decisions.  Because if they can’t agree, they go back to mediation or court (depending on the agreement), and what’s the point of constantly going back to a third party because the parents couldn’t decide on X or Y?

 

Sole custody is not about proving a parent is “not fit” or “not capable.”  It’s about who would be the better sole custodian of the child.  It’s “better”, not “best” or “bad.”  And part of “better” in many states (I practiced family law in IL and am not licensed in NY, so I’m not familiar with NY specifics) includes a number of factors, often including which parent is more likely to foster a good relationship between child and non-custodial parent.  Whether one parent travels a lot can be taken into account too, since then the parent is not available for those day-to-day decisions and the child is left either with a third party or the non-custodial parent.

 

Nor is it usually a “huge burden of proof.”  The language you are using sound more like ending parental rights (through adoption or the juvenile court system) than family law custody.  Where I practice the standard is “preponderance of the evidence,” or “more likely than not.”  Not sure about NY but it’s likely similar.

 

Does anyone have a logical third or fourth option as to why they're arguing over the prenup terms?

Without being totally up to date on the divorce, I was always under the impression that the property settlement dispute was the interpretation of the pre-nup terms.  Basically, is the Jim Beam money included in the pre-nup or not?  I suppose there could be a more nuanced “well, the initial sales money is included in the pre-nup (and thus not shared with Jason), but Jason’s appearances on BEA helped sales of Skinnygirl alcoholic products and maybe the rest, such that B earned more (from the Jim Beam sales quota money and subsequent non-alcohol products’ money) than she would have on her own and that money would be shared.”  I think that one is a much tougher road to travel though.

 

Someone else posted the dispute could be over hidden assets.  Depending on the timing (and I’m hazy on that), it’s possible Jason is arguing that Bethenny downplayed the dollar value of the Jim Beam deal, knowing that it was going to be worth much, much more.  And the second part is key, because if no one knew if/when/how much the deal would be worth, that it turned out to be worth more isn’t by itself necessarily enough to break the pre-nup.  He’d need something pretty specific from Jim Beam on how/when the deal terms were brokered to win that one, I think.

 

One of Bethenny’s problems is that she has given out statements indicating/implying that Jason was a big part of the evolution of Skinnygirl.  Others have posted links to the interviews.  And BEA had video of Jason being very involved (and likely his attorneys have obtained the materials not shown).  If there is any wiggle room in the pre-nup (and let’s remember that the length of the case isn’t evidence that there is), those statements don’t help her.  And a Court may well believe them because she made them.  Attempts to walk back the statements may well have a Judge concluding he needs to not consider anything she says about Jason’s involvement (on the “she was lying then or now, who knows but that makes her an unreliable witness” theory).  That would certainly be argument as counsel (heck, it has been my argument as counsel!).

 

Why is it up to Bethenny to just give in and pay Jason off? Why isn't it up to Jason to quit trying to get more of Bethenny's money than he already agreed to? And it was Bethenny's partner, Kanbar (sp?) that insisted on the prenup for precisely this reason.

It’s not.  I believe a number of folks here have commented that either party could give in.  But what we see is Bethenny complaining bitterly about how difficult this is for her, etc.  And she has the money to make it go away, so we focus on that.  For all we know Jason is handling this just fine and isn’t concerned the divorce is taking so long (and it’s not really taking that long).

[Crikey]

I watched this interview just now, up until the part she asks Billy what he would spend money on. I have to say, I don't dislike Bethenny but I don't like her either. I go back and forth with her all the time. This interview she loses me. She says in the interview she always goes with her gut because she never assumes that other people are smarter than she is. This was in 2011. Now she is telling us she didn't go with her gut and she let other people convince her to marry Jason. 

 

I think at the very least Bethenny and Jason used each other if they weren't really in love enough to get married. Now they are both suffering for it. But, so is their child and that is the worst part. 

Interesting, yes.  I missed that connection.

[ZoloftBlob]

Depending on the timing (and I’m hazy on that), it’s possible Jason is arguing that Bethenny downplayed the dollar value of the Jim Beam deal, knowing that it was going to be worth much, much more.  And the second part is key, because if no one knew if/when/how much the deal would be worth, that it turned out to be worth more isn’t by itself necessarily enough to break the pre-nup.  He’d need something pretty specific from Jim Beam on how/when the deal terms were brokered to win that one, I think.

 

But this does fall under option one - Jason wants more than what he agreed to.

 

Part of my frustration with this topic is the that while no one knows whats in the pre-nup, we all understand that Bethenny had Jason sign the pre-nup to protect her assets. I'm perfectly willing to concede there's a chance that Bethenny is trying to make sure that Jason gets less than what she agreed to give... but in all honesty I have never heard of the financially dominant partner doing this. Logically, if there's an issue with the prenup, the vast majority of the time, it's the financial lesser partner wanting more than what was agreed to for whatever reason.

 

In my opinion, Bethenny has nothing to gain from trying to screw Jason out of what she agreed to in the pre-nup. And Jason has a hell of a lot of financial incentive to argue the prenup because he is the one with something to gain. And yet when its pointed out that logically it makes sense that Jason is the one instigating the issue, people rush to say we don't know whats in the pre-nup. Well, prenups are created to protect a person's prior assets from becoming their partner's marital property. Bethenny was the financially dominant partner, she was protecting her assets. So if the divorce is hung up over the pre-nup - who seriously it isn't because Jason is challenging the prenup?

[One Tough Cookie]

was like WTF when I read somewhere that a judge was making Bethenny pay for Jason's legal fees and another judgment where she gives him a lot of money and he has use of the apartment he lives in now with Bryn.

 

But the more attention I pay to this clusterfuck, the more sense these judgements make to me. It is becoming more and more apparent to me that Jason was a prop in Bethenny's Ever After. Both the show and her real life. She didn't get married because she was in love or loved the guy, it would make a good spin off so Jason became her husband. I think it is beyond calculating for her to procreate just to have a subject for a show but it fit into her overall life narrative. She was getting older and wanted a child so why not. Bryn happened.

 

She literally discard the prop when the curtain falls. She didn't even have the decency to  tell him in person, she writes him a letter and hopes he takes whatever she offers and goes away quietly while she moves on to the next phase of her life.

 

In life, we encounter situations what make us into people we aren't. If a guy marries me and discards of me when it is convenient for him, the way Bethenny did Jason, I would turn into the most bitter ex he's ever had the misfortune of crossing. I will do everything in my power to bring him to heel. If I appear to be a greedy bitch in the process,  so be it.

 

I used to be on her side but as things become clearer to me, I am rooting for Jason to wring out every dime he can from her. It is sweeter that she is paying for the legal team that is squeezing the shit out of her.

 

As far as custody of her daughter. If she didn't want to share, she should have used a sperm bank. Baring that, she  should have  married someone she was willing to partner up with FOR LIFE. Or been a little bit more decent to the father when she wanted to end the union.

 

She deserves every bit of pain this resolution brings her. She brought it upon herself.

 

 

Kaduz to you for a very perceptive post. 

 

As I was watching the wedding shows and the pregnancy and moving shows, I said many times to the tv--"Jason, don't bother unpacking any of your clothes, because within a year she's gonna shit can your ass and try to erase you from your daughter's life".  I felt bad that he went into the relationship {to me at least} seriously and for keeps, and she saw him as totally expendable.  While neither one of them are perfect, I think she threw away a chance for happiness.  It's funny, when I see pics of Jason and Bryn, she's smiling, but when I see Bryn and mom, Bryn isn't usually smiling.

[Crikey]

But this does fall under option one - Jason wants more than what he agreed to.

 

Part of my frustration with this topic is the that while no one knows whats in the pre-nup, we all understand that Bethenny had Jason sign the pre-nup to protect her assets. I'm perfectly willing to concede there's a chance that Bethenny is trying to make sure that Jason gets less than what she agreed to give... but in all honesty I have never heard of the financially dominant partner doing this. Logically, if there's an issue with the prenup, the vast majority of the time, it's the financial lesser partner wanting more than what was agreed to for whatever reason.

 

In my opinion, Bethenny has nothing to gain from trying to screw Jason out of what she agreed to in the pre-nup. And Jason has a hell of a lot of financial incentive to argue the prenup because he is the one with something to gain. And yet when its pointed out that logically it makes sense that Jason is the one instigating the issue, people rush to say we don't know whats in the pre-nup. Well, prenups are created to protect a person's prior assets from becoming their partner's marital property. Bethenny was the financially dominant partner, she was protecting her assets. So if the divorce is hung up over the pre-nup - who seriously it isn't because Jason is challenging the prenup?

 

Suppose, in a prenup,  a woman agrees to pay her husband 15% of all of her business earnings while they are married, then  she decides to divorce.  Before she tells him and before she files, she  make arrangements with her clients to delay any currently due payments until after her divorce. She does this so she  gets the full amount, cutting out the 15% currently due her husband.   She then files for divorce and he questions the earnings agreed upon in the prenup.

 

He is not asking for more than the prenup, he is just asking for what was actually agreed upon in the prenup, no?

[ZoloftBlob]

He's also arguing to recieve more than what he's getting and it would be initiated by him and not her, hence falling under option one.  

 

Look, I really don't have any problem with Jason arguing the pre-nup for whatever reason he wants. I just don't see how any realistic arguement can be made that Bethenny is the one who wants the pre-nup argued. If Jason was happy with the terms of the pre-nup, since Bethenny already agreed to the terms of the pre-nup, why wouldn't she simply pay him per the terms of the pre-nup? I have seen no arguement in press, or here, that even hints that Bethenny has a problem with it. SHe has nothing to gain by initiating an arguement about the prenup that favors her.  

 

Jason has everything to gain by say, accusing her of hiding assets to cheat him out of what he thinks is due to him. If you want to be pedantic about it, fine - if he's questioning her earnings then he is the one initating the fight. He is the one wanting more than what is currently agreed upon.

 

Are there any logical reasons for Bethenny to start a fight over the prenup? Because this argument started with how Jason isn't to be blamed for the case dragging on because we don't know who is doing what to who and we don't know whats in the prenup.

[zoeysmom]

But this does fall under option one - Jason wants more than what he agreed to.

 

Part of my frustration with this topic is the that while no one knows whats in the pre-nup, we all understand that Bethenny had Jason sign the pre-nup to protect her assets. I'm perfectly willing to concede there's a chance that Bethenny is trying to make sure that Jason gets less than what she agreed to give... but in all honesty I have never heard of the financially dominant partner doing this. Logically, if there's an issue with the prenup, the vast majority of the time, it's the financial lesser partner wanting more than what was agreed to for whatever reason.

 

In my opinion, Bethenny has nothing to gain from trying to screw Jason out of what she agreed to in the pre-nup. And Jason has a hell of a lot of financial incentive to argue the prenup because he is the one with something to gain. And yet when its pointed out that logically it makes sense that Jason is the one instigating the issue, people rush to say we don't know whats in the pre-nup. Well, prenups are created to protect a person's prior assets from becoming their partner's marital property. Bethenny was the financially dominant partner, she was protecting her assets. So if the divorce is hung up over the pre-nup - who seriously it isn't because Jason is challenging the prenup?

I understand what you are saying and the way it seems to work in the real world is there is no such thing as an ironclad, you get what you came into the marriage with type pre-nup that generally survives judicial review.   There are community property laws and issues that a pre-nup just cannot cover.  What my guess is what the court is reviewing are the earnings during the marriage.  Recently, Bethenny's camp made a statement that all vacations during the marriage were working vacations as opposed to vacations that would have been as are result of community property assets.   When I read about issues like this it occurs to me this is a very thorough going over the marriage.   I would have never thought the vacations would have been part of a pre-nup. 

 

Thank you, Mrs. Peel, for you  thorough explanation.  Maybe you have an idea what the vacation issue is all about. 

[zoeysmom]

He's also arguing to recieve more than what he's getting and it would be initiated by him and not her, hence falling under option one.  

 

Look, I really don't have any problem with Jason arguing the pre-nup for whatever reason he wants. I just don't see how any realistic arguement can be made that Bethenny is the one who wants the pre-nup argued. If Jason was happy with the terms of the pre-nup, since Bethenny already agreed to the terms of the pre-nup, why wouldn't she simply pay him per the terms of the pre-nup? I have seen no arguement in press, or here, that even hints that Bethenny has a problem with it. SHe has nothing to gain by initiating an arguement about the prenup that favors her.  

 

Jason has everything to gain by say, accusing her of hiding assets to cheat him out of what he thinks is due to him. If you want to be pedantic about it, fine - if he's questioning her earnings then he is the one initating the fight. He is the one wanting more than what is currently agreed upon.

 

Are there any logical reasons for Bethenny to start a fight over the prenup? Because this argument started with how Jason isn't to be blamed for the case dragging on because we don't know who is doing what to who and we don't know whats in the prenup.

Bethenny filed for the divorce so technically she is the one putting forth the argument.  When she originally filed she wanted custody and control of the child, child support, Jason to pay the medical and dental insurance for both she and Bryn, and a big life insurance policy on Jason.  From what I understand Jason basically asked for the same.   So the fight begins when one party files.  It is the old perception argument.  Bethenny perceives all the circumstances from her viewpoint and Jason from his.

[Celia Rubenstein]

Recently, Bethenny's camp made a statement that all vacations during the marriage were working vacations as opposed to vacations that would have been as are result of community property assets.   When I read about issues like this it occurs to me this is a very thorough going over the marriage.   I would have never thought the vacations would have been part of a pre-nup.

 

Jason may be arguing that he is entitled to money so he can vacation with the same frequency and at the same standard they had during the marriage. But Bethenny (theoretically) doesn't want those vacations taken into account when figuring out what she "owes" Jason, asserting that those trips were actually work-related (as opposed to being a "couple thing") and they are not something Jason is entitled to continue to expect as an ex-husband.  

[Mrs peel]

He's also arguing to recieve more than what he's getting and it would be initiated by him and not her, hence falling under option one.

Look, I really don't have any problem with Jason arguing the pre-nup for whatever reason he wants. I just don't see how any realistic arguement can be made that Bethenny is the one who wants the pre-nup argued. If Jason was happy with the terms of the pre-nup, since Bethenny already agreed to the terms of the pre-nup, why wouldn't she simply pay him per the terms of the pre-nup? I have seen no arguement in press, or here, that even hints that Bethenny has a problem with it. SHe has nothing to gain by initiating an arguement about the prenup that favors her.

Jason has everything to gain by say, accusing her of hiding assets to cheat him out of what he thinks is due to him. If you want to be pedantic about it, fine - if he's questioning her earnings then he is the one initating the fight. He is the one wanting more than what is currently agreed upon.

Are there any logical reasons for Bethenny to start a fight over the prenup? Because this argument started with how Jason isn't to be blamed for the case dragging on because we don't know who is doing what to who and we don't know whats in the prenup.

It's a nuance that what I think he is trying to do (reading tea leaves because as we all agree none of know the real details) is determine the specifics of the pre-nup "exclusions" (for want of a better term).

I think you are right that it is Jason fighting the pre-nup, though again we don't really know because we don't know the terms of the pre-nup. But if the entire purpose of the pre-nup was to protect Skinnygirl assets, Bethenny would be very stupid to not just offer outright whatever the re-nup says, and she is not stupid. The problem may be it says they each walk away with what thwey "brought", and depending on timing that leaves room to argue about the value of Skinnygirl.

. It's a bias of mine, but in my experience it is the monied partner who can keep fighting even in the face of no good facts. The non-monied partner (and I am not sure Jason falls into this category due to the financial backers - though I do not know why they would realistically be involved without some realistic chance of success /1) usually can't keep fighting -with good lawyers - without "something" to hang their hat on, doesn't mean they are "right" or win, but money talks.

/1. Now if we later learn the "financial backers" just have money and hate Bethenny's guts enough to blow a bunch of money on opposing her, that changes everything :-)). And even if not, at some point Jason could end up with nothing even if he "wins" - investing in lawsuits is becoming a "thing" but the investors always want some profit off their investment.

Someone above commented about community property rights...I leave it to the resident NYers (former NYer here, currently watching the Yanks beating the Tigers -- YEAH A-Rod got his 3,000 hit with a homer in the first inning!! But I digress), but I do not think NY is a community property state.

What is this story about family vacations being business and that somehow benefitting Bethenny? Blanking on how that would help, but that's just a gut reaction.

Edited because Apple auto-correct changed "pre-nup" to "pre-nip" one too many times!!

Edited June 20, 2015 by Mrs peel

[WireWrap]

It's a nuance that what I think he is trying to do (reading tea leaves because as we all agree none of know the real details) is determine the specifics of the pre-nup "exclusions" (for want of a better term).

I think you are right that it is Jason fighting the pre-nup, though again we don't really know because we don't know the terms of the pre-nup. But if the entire purpose of the pre-nup was to protect Skinnygirl assets, Bethenny would be very stupid to not just offer outright whatever the re-nup says, and she is not stupid. The problem may be it says they each walk away with what thwey "brought", and depending on timing that leaves room to argue about the value of Skinnygirl.

. It's a bias of mine, but in my experience it is the monied partner who can keep fighting even in the face of no good facts. The non-monied partner (and I am not sure Jason falls into this category due to the financial backers - though I do not know why they would realistically be involved without some realistic chance of success /1) usually can't keep fighting -with good lawyers - without "something" to hang their hat on, doesn't mean they are "right" or win, but money talks.

/1. Now if we later learn the "financial backers" just have money and hate Bethenny's guts enough to blow a bunch of money on opposing her, that changes everything :-)). And even if not, at some point Jason could end up with nothing even if he "wins" - investing in lawsuits is becoming a "thing" but the investors always want some profit off their investment.

Someone above commented about community property rights...I leave it to the resident NYers (former NYer here, currently watching the Yanks beating the Tigers -- YEAH A-Rod got his 3,000 hit with a homer in the first inning!! But I digress), but I do not think NY is a community property state.

What is this story about family vacations being business and that somehow benefitting Bethenny? Blanking on how that would help, but that's just a gut reaction.

Edited because Apple auto-correct changed "pre-nup" to "pre-nip" one too many times!!

That Jason has "financial backers" has never been shown to be true beyond the "un named" source that some, like ROL, like to site as their sources. Although it could be true, it is just as likely a false rumor.

 

Not only do we not know anything about the pre-nup, we know nothing about the divorce case at all since there is a gag order in effect and it seems both sides are following it for the most part. There has been nothing from Jason, himself, at all, and nothing from his legal team. Bethenny has only spoken about the divorce in snippets on the show, her talk show, her recent book and recent interviews while her legal team is quiet.

Edited June 20, 2015 by WireWrap

[breezy424]

So, to sum it up, we really don't know anything.....  And when the divorce is settled, we really won't know anything.....  Because the settlement will most probably be confidential....

[hottesthw]

He's also arguing to recieve more than what he's getting and it would be initiated by him and not her, hence falling under option one.

Look, I really don't have any problem with Jason arguing the pre-nup for whatever reason he wants. I just don't see how any realistic arguement can be made that Bethenny is the one who wants the pre-nup argued. If Jason was happy with the terms of the pre-nup, since Bethenny already agreed to the terms of the pre-nup, why wouldn't she simply pay him per the terms of the pre-nup? I have seen no arguement in press, or here, that even hints that Bethenny has a problem with it. SHe has nothing to gain by initiating an arguement about the prenup that favors her.

Jason has everything to gain by say, accusing her of hiding assets to cheat him out of what he thinks is due to him. If you want to be pedantic about it, fine - if he's questioning her earnings then he is the one initating the fight. He is the one wanting more than what is currently agreed upon.

Are there any logical reasons for Bethenny to start a fight over the prenup? Because this argument started with how Jason isn't to be blamed for the case dragging on because we don't know who is doing what to who and we don't know whats in the prenup.

Considering were watching a season of this witch argue with everyone over anything, I'd say it's very conceivable that Bethenny is holding up this divorce as much as Jason is.

Isn't old man Morgan fighting Sonja for decades now over money in their divorce? They had a prenup as well if I'm not mistaken. Shady rich people do shady things to stay rich all the time.

[hottesthw]

Jason may be arguing that he is entitled to money so he can vacation with the same frequency and at the same standard they had during the marriage. But Bethenny (theoretically) doesn't want those vacations taken into account when figuring out what she "owes" Jason, asserting that those trips were actually work-related (as opposed to being a "couple thing") and they are not something Jason is entitled to continue to expect as an ex-husband.

And to me this is just one more example as to what a POS Bethenny is in real life. How awful to have to find out through lawyers in your divorce proceedings that those vacations you took with your new wife were nothing but a job for her.

Well at least the good thing in all this will be that when Brynn js filming her tv therapy sessions in 20 yrs, complaining about her mother and terrible childhood, she'll have all these stories and interviews to fall back on as proof. No Brynn, your mommy never loved your daddy. She just needed a spinoff and you and he were her supporting characters.

[ZoloftBlob]

Isn't old man Morgan fighting Sonja for decades now over money in their divorce?

 

Not that I am aware of. She actually got a generous settlement from him. Her problem was investing in the movie business and then getting sued to where she tried going back to Morgan for more money and lost rather badly.

[hottesthw]

Not that I am aware of. She actually got a generous settlement from him. Her problem was investing in the movie business and then getting sued to where she tried going back to Morgan for more money and lost rather badly.

She talked about lawyers fighting his lawyers. If they just simply divorced and he paid her off there would be no need. He was off the hook once she was paid. She once stated it took years for her to even get child support. The old man wasn't handing over any cash easily that's for sure. Despite any agreement that was made between them.

[ZoloftBlob]

Yes but frankly, this is Sonja - at one point she was also seeming to hope to get back with him. I mean, she is delusional. Also she is actually a good example to the overall point I was trying to make. No one really knows what the pre-nup situation was between Sonja and old man Morgan. But is anyone seriously suggesting that Sonja wasn't fighting the terms of the pre-nup? That she was completely fine with the settlement and their court battles were all initiated by her ex, the financially dominant partner who wanted the pre-nup to begin with?

[hottesthw]

The man didn't pay child support. I'd say it's easy to believe he was trying to get out of upholding his end of the deal. And based on what I've seen and read, I have no problem believing Bethenny would do the same.

[zoeysmom]

It's a nuance that what I think he is trying to do (reading tea leaves because as we all agree none of know the real details) is determine the specifics of the pre-nup "exclusions" (for want of a better term).

I think you are right that it is Jason fighting the pre-nup, though again we don't really know because we don't know the terms of the pre-nup. But if the entire purpose of the pre-nup was to protect Skinnygirl assets, Bethenny would be very stupid to not just offer outright whatever the re-nup says, and she is not stupid. The problem may be it says they each walk away with what thwey "brought", and depending on timing that leaves room to argue about the value of Skinnygirl.

. It's a bias of mine, but in my experience it is the monied partner who can keep fighting even in the face of no good facts. The non-monied partner (and I am not sure Jason falls into this category due to the financial backers - though I do not know why they would realistically be involved without some realistic chance of success /1) usually can't keep fighting -with good lawyers - without "something" to hang their hat on, doesn't mean they are "right" or win, but money talks.

/1. Now if we later learn the "financial backers" just have money and hate Bethenny's guts enough to blow a bunch of money on opposing her, that changes everything :-)). And even if not, at some point Jason could end up with nothing even if he "wins" - investing in lawsuits is becoming a "thing" but the investors always want some profit off their investment.

Someone above commented about community property rights...I leave it to the resident NYers (former NYer here, currently watching the Yanks beating the Tigers -- YEAH A-Rod got his 3,000 hit with a homer in the first inning!! But I digress), but I do not think NY is a community property state.

What is this story about family vacations being business and that somehow benefitting Bethenny? Blanking on how that would help, but that's just a gut reaction.

Edited because Apple auto-correct changed "pre-nup" to "pre-nip" one too many times!!

Thank you for answering and all your helpful insight.  Bethenny testified that Jason said, during an argument he would get financial backers to fund the attorneys fees.  There has been no showing this is true.  Twice Bethenny has been ordered to pay Jason's attorneys.  The last time was $100,000.00, and this is subject to set off.  So the only backer of Jason's is actually Bethenny.  It leads me to believe that during that same argument perhaps Bethenny threatened to annihilate  Jason in court due to her superior financial position, in other words, a bigger war chest.  So the financial backers is pretty much off the table.  I always thought it odd to use the term "financial backers"

 instead of friends that would help.  Talk about reducing the marriage to a business arrangements.  Anyway apparently. financial backers weren't needed. 

 

New York is an equitable distribution state which seems like it makes things murkier rather than clearer given the nature and timing of Bethenny's big sale to Jim Beam.  http://www.lawyers.com/~/link.aspx?_id=8B11F5A3562647EFA350B12C8D977513&_z=z   Not in response to you Mrs. Peel but for any one wondering why a pre-nup can be challenged.  Equitable distribution complicates the issue.

 

This is what I feel the vacation issue is about, since there marriage Bethenny and Jason were filmed vacationing in The Hamptons, St. Barth's, Mexico, Aspen, Southern California.  There are most likely others.  Bethenny early on in her testimony claims Jason enjoyed meeting the rich and famous and the great locales as a hanger on attached to Bethenny.   So I believe what Bethenny is saying is the trips weren't for Jason relaxation per se but in furtherance of her career.  Since Jason was working for someone at the time and had to take time off to vacation or hang around his famous wife at her work related events, I guess what remains is whether the vacations were part of their marital lifestyle.  Except for St. Barth's (their honeymoon) the baby and assorted staff were along.  Well the baby was in St. Barth's just in-utero. 

 

The other thing about Bethenny and the sale of Skinny Girl, Bethenny met Kanbar very close in time to when she met Jason.  It is obvious he is responsible for getting the initial Skinny Girl Margarita off to market. At the time of the initial SGM it was being manufactured in Canada. During their marriage which occurred about 15 months after they met, SGM became a reality not just another drink order.  The big sale to Jim Beam occurred at the height of Bethenny's popularity on her spin-off show that co-starred Jason Hoppy.  Jim Beam after buying the rights to Skinny Girl for purposes of alcoholic beverages, did not feel that Bethenny had a big enough following and within a year of acquiring it embarked on a major campaign of "drinking like a lady".  I assume on the bottle the unreadable signature is Bethenny's?  So Jason was on the show, that helped with the launch of Skinny Girl, something I am sure his attorneys are arguing.  I also believe one of the shows on BEA, post Skinny Girl, sale, was an up close and personal look at how Jason was not perfect and how mean he was to Bethenny through Bethenny starting an argument claiming he said things to her in private and the clip shows Jason walking away and commenting he did not wish to air their laundry publicly.  I guess Bethenny's attorneys could argue that Jason has been instrumental in causing a fall off in Bethenny's popularity.   I agree with all who have stated that we will never know the settlement or its components and will only have an idea of what happened if Jason goes, stays, sells the apartment or if Betheny moves back in.  I wonder if the Skinny Girl bar was considered a business fixture in the marital home?

 

I get at the end of the day marriage is just a civil contract but these two have taken it to the extreme.  To me, old Bethenny, was so anxious to find someone to love and worship her that she failed to realize the partner she wants just doesn't exist and trying to make the square peg fit in the round hole won't work.  I notice she even used part of her wedding vows this season, "the sum is greater than the parts,"  she truly does not have a sincere bone in her Skinny Girl  body. 

[KungFuBunny]

It's a nuance that what I think he is trying to do (reading tea leaves because as we all agree none of know the real details) is determine the specifics of the pre-nup "exclusions" (for want of a better term).

I think you are right that it is Jason fighting the pre-nup, though again we don't really know because we don't know the terms of the pre-nup. But if the entire purpose of the pre-nup was to protect Skinnygirl assets, Bethenny would be very stupid to not just offer outright whatever the re-nup says, and she is not stupid. The problem may be it says they each walk away with what thwey "brought", and depending on timing that leaves room to argue about the value of Skinnygirl.

. It's a bias of mine, but in my experience it is the monied partner who can keep fighting even in the face of no good facts. The non-monied partner (and I am not sure Jason falls into this category due to the financial backers - though I do not know why they would realistically be involved without some realistic chance of success /1) usually can't keep fighting -with good lawyers - without "something" to hang their hat on, doesn't mean they are "right" or win, but money talks.

/1. Now if we later learn the "financial backers" just have money and hate Bethenny's guts enough to blow a bunch of money on opposing her, that changes everything :-)). And even if not, at some point Jason could end up with nothing even if he "wins" - investing in lawsuits is becoming a "thing" but the investors always want some profit off their investment.

Someone above commented about community property rights...I leave it to the resident NYers (former NYer here, currently watching the Yanks beating the Tigers -- YEAH A-Rod got his 3,000 hit with a homer in the first inning!! But I digress), but I do not think NY is a community property state.

What is this story about family vacations being business and that somehow benefitting Bethenny? Blanking on how that would help, but that's just a gut reaction.

Edited because Apple auto-correct changed "pre-nup" to "pre-nip" one too many times!!

Egads...somehow Brandi G broke into Apple's auto-correct

[Aethera]

All,

 

I think we all realize we don't know what was in the pre-nup, and we probably won't know what exactly the terms of the divorce wind up being. We don't know for sure who is holding things up, who has more money for the fight, what custody arrangements are in discussion, etc.  All of the posts here proceed from the assumption that we don't have facts about a lot of issues. However, speculation is fun, and is completely allowed as long as no one presents their opinion as facts, and we all remain civil!  Please do not chide your fellow posters for speculating, and report posts you think are going over the line into fact-stating.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

[PhilMarlowe2]

Putting aside the fact that I'm embarrassed for Alex every time she writes a blog or comments publicly about her old show or other reality tv shows, I actually agree with her about Bethenny using people as props.

 

The second-hand embarrassment is so intense, it kills me. This is the same woman who gloated, "To a certain group of people in New York, status is everything." Alex is just pissed Bethenny doesn't return her phone calls. Because you know the VanKempens would love nothing more than to be Bethenny's prop if it helped them climb up the social ladder!

Edited June 21, 2015 by PhilMarlowe2

[izabella]

For some reason, I thought the main issue in their divorce battle was the apartment for which Bethenny picked out every single white tile.  Isn't that what she was explaining during the first or second episode?

 

Anyway, this divorce is dragging on longer than their actual marriage, so I'd want to throw both of them out of court. 

[QuinnM]

Oh there has been a new court filing.  As expected once the trust was declared invalid Bethenny's lawyers filed to change the residency requirement that Jason had and to stop even temporary spousal support since the prenup waived all present and future support.  So that is the first we've heard in court documents on the content of the pre-nup.  This is ROL so no supporting documentation.  Perhaps the king of court paper, TMZ, might pick something up.

[shoegal]

Moving from reunion topic:

If Bethenny was single when she bought the apartment, it would be hers, although Jason would still have rights because they lived in it as a married couple. BUT they bought it as a married couple for the use as the family home, not just Bethenny's sole usage. Jason has a claim and will get a % of the apartments worth if NY law is anything like Pa's laws. My son bought his home before he was married, they were engaged though, my DIL is not on the deed or the mortgage but if they ever get divorced, she will get about 40% of the market value of the house, oh, and he pays 90% of all the house hold bills as he makes far more money than she ever will.

Bethenny and Jason have a prenup, where the SkinnyGirl money is Bethenny's money, and the purchases made with SkinnyGirl money are Bethenny's property. With the dissolution of the trust, I suspect Jason's free ride is going to come to a screeching halt, and not a minute too soon as far as I'm concerned.

[WireWrap]

Moving from reunion topic:

Bethenny and Jason have a prenup, where the SkinnyGirl money is Bethenny's money, and the purchases made with SkinnyGirl money are Bethenny's property. With the dissolution of the trust, I suspect Jason's free ride is going to come to a screeching halt, and not a minute too soon as far as I'm concerned.

We do not know what is or isn't in the prenup, nothing, zip, zero, nada, because it has never been made public.

[shoegal]

We do not know what is or isn't in the prenup, nothing, zip, zero, nada, because it has never been made public.

Court documents regarding the divorce are public, which reference the terms of the pre-nup, so we do know something. http://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Bethenny-Frankel-Appeal-Doc.pdf

[WireWrap]

Court documents regarding the divorce are public, which reference the terms of the pre-nup, so we do know something. http://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Bethenny-Frankel-Appeal-Doc.pdf

The divorce is not over yet, there is a "gag order" in effect, so we know very little and the prenup has never been made public. The only thing we have any documents on is the trust and although the trust was overturned, we do not know the ramifications of that yet because the final decision has not been made involving things purchased during the marriage, including but not exclusive to the apartment. Only when the final decision regarding property/money is handed down by the judge will we know anything. I stand by my statement that because it was bought during the marriage for the intent as use of the marital home, Jason will be entitled to a % of the apartments current market value.

[shoegal]

The divorce is not over yet, there is a "gag order" in effect, so we know very little and the prenup has never been made public. The only thing we have any documents on is the trust and although the trust was overturned, we do not know the ramifications of that yet because the final decision has not been made involving things purchased during the marriage, including but not exclusive to the apartment. Only when the final decision regarding property/money is handed down by the judge will we know anything. I stand by my statement that because it was bought during the marriage for the intent as use of the marital home, Jason will be entitled to a % of the apartments current market value.

Right, which is why is said I suspect that Jason's free ride is about to be over. Despite the gag order, we do know Bethenny bought the apartment with her money, we do know that Jason waived spousal support in the prenup, and we do know that the trust has been dissolved and therefore legally never happened. What we are waiting on is the title to be amended to reflect the proper owner who purchased the home, Bethenny.

Personally, I think the years Jason has spent living for free in the apartment should be considered his share. Call it time served.

[WireWrap]

Right, which is why is said I suspect that Jason's free ride is about to be over. Despite the gag order, we do know Bethenny bought the apartment with her money, we do know that Jason waived spousal support in the prenup, and we do know that the trust has been dissolved and therefore legally never happened. What we are waiting on is the title to be amended to reflect the proper owner who purchased the home, Bethenny.

Personally, I think the years Jason has spent living for free in the apartment should be considered his share. Call it time served.

Again, even though Bethenny bought the apartment with her SG money, it was bought as the marital home during the marriage and that changes everything. It remains to be seen what will happen concerning the apartment and any money she earned during the marriage, as he did help her earn it.

[shoegal]

Again, even though Bethenny bought the apartment with her SG money, it was bought as the marital home during the marriage and that changes everything.

Not if it is in contradiction with the the terms of the prenup, as the court filing by Bethenny's team claim.

Edited August 17, 2015 by shoegal

[Mrs peel]

Court documents regarding the divorce are public, which reference the terms of the pre-nup, so we do know something. http://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Bethenny-Frankel-Appeal-Doc.pdf

Are you referring to the statement that both sides want to enforce the pre-nup? I read that and thought, sure, but they are fighting about what the enforcement means, because there is still no determination (reading the tea leaves of this appeal) as to whether the Skinnygirl money is all non-marital. It's lawyer-speak, trying to make things look better than they are. Bethenny's side is trying to convey/imply to the appellate court that now that the trust has been voided, "we're all done, nothing else to hash out." But if that were true, the trial court judge would have finalized the divorce.

I was surprised to read the temp maintenance order was from this April, seems pretty late in the process to implement temp maintenance.

[Talented Tenth]

Again, even though Bethenny bought the apartment with her SG money, it was bought as the marital home during the marriage and that changes everything. It remains to be seen what will happen concerning the apartment and any money she earned during the marriage, as he did help her earn it.

 

Are you arguing legalities only or what is right and wrong?  If Bethenny bought it, it should be hers.  If Jason contributed money to anything that will stay permanently with the apartment, I think it's fair for him to get that value back.  I don't think he should get a come up strictly for being married to a rich woman.  He wasn't a stay-at-home dad and they were only married a short amount if time.

[VioletMarx]

Whatever is going on with the case, and we really have no clue, the only reason we know anything at all about this divorce is because Bethanny talks about it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Jason hasn't uttered a single word about his daughter's mother to the press since they split. Even last night on the reunion, she couldn't pass up an opportunity to bash Bryn's dad.

 

That tells me more than any cash settlement ever will.

[WireWrap]

Are you arguing legalities only or what is right and wrong?  If Bethenny bought it, it should be hers.  If Jason contributed money to anything that will stay permanently with the apartment, I think it's fair for him to get that value back.  I don't think he should get a come up strictly for being married to a rich woman.  He wasn't a stay-at-home dad and they were only married a short amount if time.

Both, the legal end is important, the apartment was bought after they were married for use as the marital/family home. As for the other side, I am not sure that those defending Bethenny as sole owner of the apartment would take her side had she been the husband who did this to his soon to be ex and mother of his only child.  

[zoeysmom]

Are you arguing legalities only or what is right and wrong?  If Bethenny bought it, it should be hers.  If Jason contributed money to anything that will stay permanently with the apartment, I think it's fair for him to get that value back.  I don't think he should get a come up strictly for being married to a rich woman.  He wasn't a stay-at-home dad and they were only married a short amount if time.

He was a huge part of pushing her brand.  He co-starred with her on her television shows and that exposure was instrumental in getting Bethenny the Jim Beam contract.  He earned every penny he gets from Bethenny just as a woman would who helped her husband build his brand.  Bethenny has a documented history of using people to build her brand and trying to get out of paying them.

 

To me, if it meant having a better co-parenting relationship with my child's father I would give up a twentieth of my net worth.  A little stability in Bryn's life might be a good thing.

[shoegal]

As for the other side, I am not sure that those defending Bethenny as sole owner of the apartment would take her side had she been the husband who did this to his soon to be ex and mother of his only child.

I can only speak for myself but absolutely, 100% I would. This is not about gender. If Jason could take over the loan payments on the apartment, that might make me see things differently. However, Bethenny and only Bethenny pays the bill, and Jason gets a free ride? Nope, not in my world. Man, woman or child, makes no difference to me.

[WireWrap]

I can only speak for myself but absolutely, 100% I would. This is not about gender. If Jason could take over the loan payments on the apartment, that might make me see things differently. However, Bethenny and only Bethenny pays the bill, and Jason gets a free ride? Nope, not in my world. Man, woman or child, makes no difference to me.

The Bottom line is that he is not going to get the apartment, and I never claimed he would, but he will get a % of it's current market value. Bethenny will have to either buy Jason out or she will sell it and give him whatever % the Judge/Court decides because it was bought during the marriage as the marital home. And we do NOT know what or if Jason pays any bills, unless of course you have seen only her write the checks for ALL of the bills personally yourself. JS

[shoegal]

The Bottom line is that he is not going to get the apartment, and I never claimed he would, but he will get a % of it's current market value. Bethenny will have to either buy Jason out or she will sell it and give him whatever % the Judge/Court decides because it was bought during the marriage as the marital home. And we do NOT know what or if Jason pays any bills, unless of course you have seen only her write the checks for ALL of the bills personally yourself. JS

Paying bills is not paying the mortgage, and the court documents released state that Bethenny and Bethenny alone pays the mortgage....and Bethenny pays Jason 11k a month to maintain the apartment, so I'm sure he is paying bills, with money she sends him.

I believe Bethenny will get the apartment outright in the end, based on the (fraudulent) trust being dissolved and the conditions of the prenup. Of course, that doesn't negate the fact that he's lived there for free for the past 2+ years.

Edited August 19, 2015 by shoegal

[NewDigs]

Maybe Betthenny should have thought about all of this before she began her grasping climb to the top.

But nooooo. She decides to throw a child into the dysfunctional mix. And I do not believe that she thought all was well in Bethy+Jason-land. I think she saw a route to HER success and would/will climb over anyone or thing in her way.

I think she is an ugly person.

[goofygirl]

This is all sort of reminding me of the Gunvalson divorce.