I’m so happy when I correctly assess the potential for crazy divorce drama. And I totally predicted this Bobby Flay-Stephanie March mess. Flay has never been discreet, and there were always rumors about his wandering eye, especially around his female employees. So obviously, when March and Flay split up and he filed for divorce, I assumed (correctly) that we would be hearing about alleged affairs and just how much he (allegedly) fooled around on Stephanie. What I didn’t predict was the idea that Stephanie and her team would be using those rumors to try to throw out the pre-nup. Flay made March sign a prenup that would only guarantee her $5000 a month. I don’t even think she gets the NYC apartment.
Anyway, as we heard over the weekend, Page Six got some leaked information about Flay’s alleged three-year affair with his assistant, a younger woman named Elyse Tirrell. Flay’s lawyer slammed the story as a petty PR ploy by March’s camp, and Flay’s business partner slammed March personally by basically saying March was no angel either. And now we’re all caught up. So, March’s lawyer – who seems perfectly happy to play all of this out in press – issued a new statement about the Page Six allegations of Flay’s three-year affair and how Flay’s camp says March’s lawyer is behind everything.
March’s attorney, Deborah Lans of Cohen Clair Lans Greifer & Thorpe LLP, tells Us that this is not the case.
“Stephanie has worked through all of this to maintain her privacy and her dignity,” she says of March, adding that the actress had surgery last week and is now living with her mother in New York as she recovers.
“Stephanie is terribly upset by what she has been reading in the paper,” Lans adds of the divorce drama. “I would say that what Bobby’s lawyer and his friends are saying is a combination of speculation and projection on their part. There are profound issues with the agreement that was signed at their wedding but we will deal with those in the court,” the lawyer continues of the couple’s prenuptial agreement. “I’m confident a court will consider the agreement to be unconscionable… Stephanie hopes people will respect her privacy and be sophisticated enough to read through what’s coming from the other side.”
Huh. On one side, if I’m ever fighting a bitter divorce battle, I hope I have a ballsy, take-no-prisoners lawyer like this on my side. On the other side, for all of us out here in the cheap seats, March’s lawyer is being too cute by half. I respect the effort to turn this all around on Flay and his people, but it was Stephanie March’s friend who went to Page Six to talk about Flay’s affair. That story came from March’s camp. End of story. I’d also like to see March’s lawyers dial down the rhetoric a little bit – I mean, we all know Flay cheated (allegedly!) and I think most of us believe that March should get the prenup thrown out. But the prenup is not “unconscionable”. We’re not talking about genocide or human trafficking. It’s just a divorce battle!
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Still wondering why Olivia Benson hasn’t stepped in and fixed this yet.
They both need a little BD Wong upside the head.
But which Olivia Benson? The SVU character or Taylor Swift’s cat?
Well with this ridiculous “unconscionable” uncoupling, I don’t think it would matter at this point. Cat’s can be good mediators.
Oh wait, answered my own question: the SVU character, because the last thing Bobby Flay needs in his life is another kitty.
LOL @ “unconscionable” uncoupling. BRILLIANT!
Honestly I think he should just pay a little more & end this quickly & quietly. I think March should have had a better lawyer read over the pre-nup before she signed it.
indeed. considering everyone knows he’s a horndog and it was his third marriage.
Love can make people naive. She was said to resist Flay and made him have to convince her those old ways were over for him. And for a time he did just that. Then they got married and it was too late.
It’s not hard to enter a state of denial. It’s Very hard to realise you’re in that state and how to get out.
“the agreement that was signed at their wedding…”
It sounds like it was signed at their wedding, which is considered “under duress” and can nullify the prenup.
Divorce is hell as is, but add in all these other factors and it’s bloody. The only thing I can say is at least they didn’t have kids together.
I thought for a moment she was wearing the same belt in both photos and was impressed by her resourcefulness. Less impressed by the too obviously fake boobs on display. And by the shorts set that it looks like she picked up at the gift shop in Giverny.
Ahhhh her fake boobs are doing that scary Tori Spelling thing at the top
Are they fake? Not just pushed up on a thin frame?
she is a lovely woman, but i’ve never been impressed with the way she dresses…
geez…i’ve said before…i hope this drama ends soon so i can make up with bobby and start eating in his restaurants again.
his food is REALLY good…
“Unconscionable” is likely part of the legal standard for getting the prenup thrown out not a random descriptor.
That’s right, “unconscionable” is a legal term, usually used to describe contracts which were signed under duress, unfair/uneven bargaining position, etc.
Right it’s just a legal term that is applied to contracts that are one sided or unfair and therefore cannot be enforced. It’s not the same thing as the way you would use the word outside the legal field.
“There are profound issues with the agreement that was signed at their wedding but we will deal with those in the court”.
Did anyone notice that Stephanie March’s lawyer just claimed that the prenup was signed AT THEIR WEDDING? That may be the basis of getting it thrown out (“I won’t walk down the aisle, i know the guests are in their seats, unless you sign”) – that folks is coercion and I am no lawyer, but that might be something to litigate.
I think you’re right. Most attorneys I know want you to have it in place and signed at least 3 months prior to the wedding. If it was signed the day of, it smacks of coercion. She probably didn’t even have the opportunity for an attorney to read it over.
Or worse. His attorney and a witness were there adding extra pressure while guests waited outside. Jerk move.
exactly what I was thinking.
Isn’t it romantic…
That IS grounds for a nullification of the prenup. That and that it was a lopsided agreement (this according to an attorney friend who specializes in divorce law in New York State.)
I can’t decide if it’s Duress, Coercion or both. Still, it IS absolutely grounds to toss the whole thing. In which case Flay needs to be taken down a few pegs.
IF it is true I hope it gets thrown out pronto and he has to pay through the nose. Flay treats women like sh*t and has done for many years. But this would be bad…even for the likes of him.
I wonder if they’re trying to ‘shame’ him into giving her more in a new settlement or quietly agree to more money.
If so I wonder how effective that’ll be? He seems like the type to do what he wants and not care what anyone thinks. If he was afraid of her leaking things and embarrassing him he’d have immediately offered more money and force her to sign a non-disclosure.
For now it seems like she’s trying to shine a light on something everyone knew and he’s not worried.
Because it came from March’s friend does not mean it was approved of by March or that she even knew her friend was going to do this.
I have a prenup and i’m happy to have it. A “just in case” so a tough situation doesn’t have to get worse. There are pages upon pages that are just..
sign here if you agree… and sign here that you understood what you just agreed to…. and sign here that you understood you agreed to what you agreed to. For everything! I signed more times for that than we did for our mortgage.
Along with timelines to agree to those things x number of days before the marriage is filed.
You can get lost in the legal wording.
For March i suspect she was in love and blind. While Flay was calculated and entered into the marriage fully aware he wasn’t going to take it seriously.
Saying it’s “unconscionable” is correct wording. She was deceived entering into a contract/marriage in good faith.
Kind of glad Flay started to fight this. He has way too many skeletons and we’re about to get a mistress parade… unless he settles.
“Unconscionable” is a legal term meaning grossly unfair, and is used commonly, so not hyperbolic as it would otherwise seem in general conversation.
Sign that your marriage may not be meant to last: your husband had you sign your prenup at your wedding.
Sign your husband and his attorney cannot be trusted–they expect you/pressure you to sign at your wedding.
Can you imagine if your intended pulled this on the day of your marriage? I would be fit to be tied but would probably sign to avoid the humiliation of canceling after everyone is already there and expecting a wedding. If he did that to her, the prenup should be challenged.
I’ve been thinking about that. All your family and friends there, many of whom have travelled specifically for the occasion… the money and time spent planning the wedding… and then having to sign a prenup under those circumstances? I probably would have signed too. If Flay actually pulled a stunt like that it says a lot about his character; a prenup is supposed to be about making decisions when everyone has a cool head, not about strong arming your soon to be spouse.
This may actually get REALLY interesting if indeed he dropped this on her at their wedding. Flay may be legally flayed, lol.
” Flay made March sign a prenup that would only guarantee her $5000 a month. I don’t even think she gets the NYC apartment.”
March wasn’t forced to sign anything. She wanted to marry a millionaire so she signed what she now thinks is a crappy pre-nup. I wonder if she planned all along to fight it in the event they divorced.
I heard they’re selling the NYC apt, she gets $1 million as her share, plus $50k in moving expenses. I also heard that he’s moving or looking to buy a more expensive place for himself.
Anne
She couldn’t have known. Your theory only works if she had no intention of being in this marriage forever and could predict the future with crazy accuracy. It’s just not likely.
And yes he’s a millionaire. She knew lots of millionaires and this one courted her until she would agree to date him. And if you fell in love and was sprung moments before your own wedding to sign it so things can continue would you refuse and on the spot end a relationship with the man you are in love with?
As for the NY apartment. They both put in money for it. She’s getting back what she put in. Nothing more. And yes he’s looking for a new place. Lots of couples do after a divorce.
Your opinion on this just seems to assume and make giant leaps of intention when there’s just nothing to support that. I guess if March wanted the prenup on her wedding day and requested it it might makes sense, but that wasn’t the case. If she set up a woman to become his mistress maybe then. But that wasn’t the case either.
I like your comments, but this is an outrageous theory.