Stephanie March claims she made big contributions to Bobby Flay’s business

wenn22455939

Here are some photos of Stephanie March from May 6th that I never got around to posting. She was attending Mariska Hargitay’s Joyful Heart fundraiser (sidenote: I love Mariska so much for starting Joyful Heart, which funds sexual violence education and therapeutic vacations for survivors of rape, sexual assault and domestic violence). This was Stephanie’s first (and only) big public appearance since separating from Bobby Flay in April.

Flay filed for divorce shortly after March announced their split, and ever since then, they’ve been lobbing bombs at each other publicly and privately. Like, Flay canceled all of their joint credit cards and he’s insisting on following the strict terms of their pre-nup. Meanwhile, Stephanie has made sure everyone knows that Flay cheated on her with his assistant (allegedly!). So what’s new with this messy divorce? March is still trying to trying to get the court to set aside the prenup. And her lawyers have a new argument!

Bobby Flay’s estranged wife claims she was the famous chef’s secret sauce … that nothing went on a plate in his restaurant unless it passed her taste test. We’ve learned Stephanie March has filed legal docs to set aside their prenup, claiming in part it’s unconscionable to enforce an agreement that leaves her with table scraps when she’s the reason he became wildly successful.

She claims Bobby told her she has “an amazing palate” and relied on her to taste test his recipes. She says she sampled a number of items at their home and gave thumbs up and down, which led to the finished product. She specifically cites Bobby’s NYC restaurant, Bar Americain.

We’re told in her argument to the judge she zeroes in on Bobby’s famed NYC restaurant, Bolo, (which, ironically, didn’t last). Stephanie says during a vacation to Spain she pushed him into including tapas on the menu — something she says he was against. But Stephanie says she prevailed, and the restaurant became an enormous success, earning 3 stars from the New York Times. Stephanie says she was also heavily involved in the design and ambience of all of Bobby’s restaurants, right down to music and lighting.

Stephanie is trying to undo the prenup, which provides her with $5k a month. She’d also get around $1 million as a buyout for the family home. We’re told Bobby is firm … his business is successful because of him, not Stephanie.

[From TMZ]

I have mixed feelings about this whole thing. I mean… their marriage was not some quickie six-month haze. They were married for a decade and she was his wife and partner. She helped him psychologically and emotionally for ten long years (while he fooled around on her), and her presence on his arm gave him an added air of respectability (even though we still heard all of the cheating rumors). I’m sure she did help out and have input on various aspects of his businesses and I’m sure her contributions had some kind of financial benefits. But it does seem like March is going a little bit overboard with how she tries to get the prenup thrown out. Still, I do hope that the pre-nup gets thrown out. Or maybe Bobby Flay just decides to give her a one-time settlement to get her to stop running to the press.

Oh, and the NYDN says that they had a court hearing yesterday and afterwards, Flay’s publicist was seen briefing the press. March ran over to Flay and bitched him out because no one is supposed to be talking to the press. Rii-ight.

wenn22456461

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

70 Responses to “Stephanie March claims she made big contributions to Bobby Flay’s business”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Darkladi says:

    Taste test? weak sauce, Stephanie, weak sauce. 😣

    • Amy says:

      Yeah that was…I hope she’s got something better than tapas…but if she even had to go to tapas I know she doesn’t.

    • LVN says:

      Get ten years worth of income and a big payment for contributions you made to the business. Yes she deserves a big chunk, IMO, She’s his wife.

  2. Mirn says:

    Take the $5k and get a job, honey. It makes my teeth itch when people do this. If YOU made his company successful, why didn’t you do it for yourself?

    • tracking says:

      +1 I feel for her, it’s painful to be betrayed, but why did she agree to such a paltry sum in the pre-nup in the first place? She knew his history! She agreed to that sum, and should abide by that. Anything she did for him in the course of the marriage (no mention of the financial and social perks of being his wife for that decade) was willing and, frankly, seems pretty minor.

      • Red says:

        I agree with you. If you are going to sign a pre-nup, make it favorable to you.

        I am tired of men and women signing these sorry pre-nups just to marry their rich partner.

    • TX says:

      in theory she is entitled to more, IMO. I really believe if one party gives up a career to make a marriage work, the other is responsible for substantial support should the marriage fail. However, she signed a prenup and if she doesn’t have a contractually supported reason to void it, i feel like a judge needs to stick with it or what’s the point of any contract?

    • anne_000 says:

      @ Mirn

      I agree. If she’s that much of an expert in designing restaurants, helping to create winning recipes, and growing multi-million dollar businesses, then she should put that on her CV and get a seven-figure job in that industry.

      Are restaurant insiders falling over themselves trying to hire her? If not, why not?

      • anne_000 says:

        Also, if she’s that much of a great restaurateur, then how come she didn’t ask to be given a salary as a consultant? Does she NEVER think of her own financial future?

      • Audrey says:

        She probably thought they would last since she turned a blind eye to his cheating

      • anne_000 says:

        @ Audrey

        The guy had a history of womanizing and two divorces under his belt when she married him.

        Did she think she was that great of a catch?

  3. PunkyMomma says:

    I’m playing my little violin for both of them. No sympathy whatsoever.

  4. Kath says:

    While I think this latest argument is lame, I kind of want her to take him to the cleaners.

    She signed a ludicrously one-sided pre-nup, which she probably thought she didn’t care about in the first flush of ‘lurrve’ and all. But 10 years later, 10 years older, and having been screwed over multiple times while you are trying to care for your dying mother… yeah, I would be pissed too.

    Of course she probably should have known better in the first place, given his track record, but finding yourself an older actress with fewer job prospects, some major caring responsibilities and a bad case of humiliation… I hope he has to cough up.

    Perhaps the $$$ will be enough of a disincentive to stop Flay repeatedly marrying people and cheating on them.

    After all, these sorts of pre-nups are really an attempt to circumvent state law about the division of assets. In California you need to split things 50/50 after 10 years, which may be extreme, but I think this pre-nup is completely over-the-top in terms of things favouring the husband.

    • Izzy says:

      Apparently she also signed it three days before the wedding? That seems an awful lot like “oh by the way, wedding’s not gonna happen if you don’t sign this,” which is coercive. If I ever get married, that prenup will be one of the first things attended to and out of the way so we can focus on the marriage.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      Then she shouldn’t have signed it. If a man that wealthy wanted to marry me and offered me those terms, I would laugh in his face. Why should I dedicate myself to a person who wants to leave me relatively impoverished if it doesn’t work out? It’s a stingy, creepy document that speaks volumes about him, but she signed it. I have no sympathy.

      • Meatball says:

        I have very little sympathy for her either. She was a 30 year old working actress, not some 18 year old fresh out of high school. If I was set to marry a man and he was worth a lot and put this agreement in my face days before the wedding, there would be no wedding. He is no good, she knew that and if he placed it in front of her 72 hours before their wedding day, then that says a great deal about him. However, she chose to sign. The man has been married twice before and has money, obviously there would be a pre-nup in place, so I also think if those 3 day claims are true then she is an idiot for not asking about it sooner. You can be in love and happy, but still be smart.
        She is going to waste all her money paying a lawyer to throw around whatever claims they can think of and hope something sticks.

      • Jade says:

        You’re right GNAT but some people are weaker. So sometimes being a third party, it’s easy and makes common sense to say no and scoff but in the throes of love or passion, your mind gets clouded (not only in this scenario but in many, heck that’s how you get some unwanted pregnancies). Frankly, I certainly could imagine myself not thinking straight before a wedding. Yea she should know better, I think she knows that and I think she knows deep down this defence is weak.

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        Don’t get me wrong. I have done weak and stupid things when I was young. I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. I don’t think I would have been dumb enough to sign this agreement, but if I had, I’d put the responsibility where it belonged – on me. She’s acting like a victim when she made a very poor, very expensive decision.

      • Kath says:

        I seem to have too much sympathy these days! I expressed sympathy for Iggy Azalea the other day and people slapped me down.

        Perhaps it’s because of Stephanie March’s carer role and the knowledge of the long, hard road in front of her re: caring for a dying family member that has me sympathising. To be dealing with that AND a cheating husband AND his hardball lawyers AND thinking about losing your home and how on earth you’re going to find an income… yeah, she’s not the worst-off person in the world but I do have some empathy.

      • bella says:

        i say do whatever you can do to make him writhe in embarrassment, shame and give him many sleepless nights.
        whether she gets the money is irrelevant.
        this is about revenge.
        well deserved revenge.
        he humiliated her and probably crushed her with the ongoing cheating.
        do what you have to do, stephanie, until you feel satisfied.

        still love this idiot’s restaurants, though.
        gawd…the food is SO delicious.

      • meme says:

        Me neither. A contact is a contract. She was dumb to sign it. Bobby is a fabulous chef and I love going to his restaurants.

      • Sherry says:

        No sympathy from me either. I think he had one restaurant when they got married. If she wanted more, she should have negotiated a better prenup, something along the lines of an infidelity clause and any other businesses he starts during the course of the marriage she is entitled to a percentage of those businesses. She did none of this.

        She agreed to the $5,000 a month. She’s a college graduate and perfectly capable of making a living for herself.

        He’s a douchebag, but she does not deserve more than she agreed to. If prenups can be overturned, what’s the point of having one?

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        @Kath
        Oh, gawd, I forgot about the dying relative. Ok, I feel for her on that.

      • Bridget says:

        I think it’s easy to say “I wouldn’t have signed it” but if it was true that he sprung it on her right before the wedding, I don’t know that I would have been able to stay strong in that kind of pressure.

      • anon33 says:

        Yeah, but everyone has something going on in their lives.

        This is still a binding legal contract and she had an obligation to familairize herself with the terms of the agreement before signing it. For example, I was under quite a bit of pressure from banks and the mortgage companies, etc., and my father was sick (he’s fine now) when I bought my house, but I still read EVERY SINGLE LINE of that contract, and wouldn’t have signed it if something wasn’t right.

        Her having a dying relative, or feeling pressure, quite frankly, doesn’t negate the fact that she made a poor decision. “Change of mind” isn’t, and has never been, a defense to breaking a contract, and she obviously cannot claim that she wasn’t properly informed of the terms, or that she was pressured (which I understand is only gossip/speuclation at this point), or she would have already.

        This is precisely why we have a legal system where emotions don’t come into play.

      • Bridget says:

        I disagree with you there Anon33 – the party applying the pressure is most definitely not supposed to be the party that stands to gain the most from the contract. I believe that is considered coercion. This is precisely why our legal system has the rules it does about the signing of a contract.

        And yes, it is currently speculation at this point, gleaned from a comment that March’s lawyer made. Whether or not it is valid will be easy to tell in what ends up happening when it comes to enforcement of the prenup.

    • anne_000 says:

      Is she saying she was too weak and stupid ten years ago?

      If so, then maybe he could ask for an annulment instead of a divorce based on her not being of sound mind ten years ago.

  5. Lucy2 says:

    Unless she has some actual proof that she did all of that for the business, she’s going to have a hard time. If she doesn’t, then I think she is stuck with the terms of the prenup she signed, and needs to go rebuild her own career.

    • paleokifaru says:

      Agreed. And I mean I let my husband vent about work but that doesn’t mean I’m responsible for his successes there you know? I get that marriages, good ones at least, support both people and should hopefully make them better in many aspects of their lives. But it was pretty widely known Bobby wasn’t good at marriages and Stephanie was old enough to consider that before signing any papers.

  6. PHD Gossip says:

    She is not responsible for his success because she sampled his cooking. FULL STOP.

  7. Jade says:

    She made mistakes with this pre-nup and having faith in his fidelity, no doubt about it. But I still feel a bit of sympathy for her; she did spend 10 years with him, is an aging actress and has to tend do a dying mother. 5k is still better than nothing though…

    • tracking says:

      Why does any able working person get alimony? It’s sexist and stupid. If she chose to give up her career in order to become a woman of leisure and it didn’t work out, tough luck. I might feel differently if she stayed home to care for children, but, in this case, unless he pressured her to give up her career for some reason (and she can prove it), I have no sympathy.

      • Blondey says:

        I second this. They are both successful professionals in their own right and were when they got together. Just because his career skyrocketed does not make her entitled to break their agreement. It would be different if there was no pre-nup, she stalled her career to raise children, worked to put him through college, or actively worked in his restaurant businesses. She is not exactly on the fast-track to poverty.

      • Nephelim says:

        Clap, clap Clap

    • Anne says:

      If the pre-nup is that unbalanced, I think he should just quietly settle with her. They both look bad in this situation. Her exaggerated demands are probably the result of his respecting her so little and being so ungenerous with her (not just financially, but emotionally).

  8. Hautie says:

    I am more surprised that Stephanie did not stash money away, while they were married. Especially when she knew he was cheating.

    I can recall when that ugly divorce of Shaq’s happen… his wife had enough sense to know what he was doing. And had set up a little side business in her name only, to make sure she was not left high and dry.

    And when he found out about it… he was p*ssed. He had every intention of screwing her over with their pre-nup settlement. And Shaunie was one step ahead of him. She had planned for her future.

    So ladies… never let a man have all the control of your financial future. Be prepared. Have some cash put away. Where it is not easily findable, for anyone nosy looking of it… 🙂

    • anon33 says:

      Or, even better, don’t give him ANY control over your finances. Get your own finances, or this is what happens. It’s a story older than time, and is why I would never choose to allow my husband to support me (unless I was ill or disabled.)

  9. Amy says:

    That defense is so bad I’m cringing in my seat.

    She might as well have said she only let him go to work in the brightest whitest Chef’s uniform and that helped his success. Smh. Stephanie this is the part where you and your lawyer have an honest gritty no holds barred conversation. Hash it out – can you win this? Don’t let her waffle on you (amazingly enough these food puns are not intentional) and if she says she doesn’t see a significant change in the amount of money you’ll receive then let it go.

    Too much straw-grasping and rumored leaks are only hurting your case and making it really seem like you just want money because you got burned (I’m gonna sit in a corner now).

  10. Burgher says:

    Team Stephanie!!!

  11. Lbliss says:

    I wonder if there was anything in the prenup about cheating?

    • Crumpet says:

      That is my question as well. I thought if it could be proven that the cheating was real, it would invalidate a prenup. But is that only my ever hopeful imagination?

      • Meatball says:

        I don’t think you can invalidate a prenup based on cheating. Only fraud or duress and I think something else, otherwise you are out of luck. Given his history he was never going to put a cheating clause in it, which would have given her more if he cheated, but given his history she should have insisted on it.

      • Sahi says:

        No way. Cheating has no effect on the validity.

      • paranormalgirl says:

        You can invalidate a prenup based on coercion, no representation, or if the prenup is wildly lopsided, given the financial situation of the parties involved.

      • Anne says:

        Wow. Are cheating clauses common in pre-nups? Somehow, I imagine that could backfire by making one or both partners feel unhappy, trapped and resentful.

        It’s one thing to freely agree not to cheat because you are committed to a relationship. That’s ideal. It’s quite another thing to feel legally bound by your strict agreement not to. That could make some people quite rebellious and resentful, imo.

        If I thought I needed a cheating clause in a pre-nup, I would re-think my choice to marry, frankly. You can’t force someone to be faithful to you.

  12. Kiddo says:

    I will have to disagree strongly. This woman already has proven that she lacks ‘good taste’ based on the fact that she married Flay in the first place. Case closed!

    • mams says:

      lol!

    • Jade says:

      Exactly Kiddo. That’s why it’s very hard to sympathise fully for her.

      @anon33 Her being weak or in love was never an excuse or to absolve her responsibility for signing something without thinking through the terms. Just trying to postulate what it would be like in her shoes if the prenup was allegedly shoved in her face days before the wedding. No excuses. She is not starving on the streets, is able bodied and she can still find other types of work. All of us have bigger problems. Just a bit of empathy for trying to handle a divorce while caring for a sick mother.

  13. Jayna says:

    She was a good wife for him for ten years and he’s a jerk. Get the best deal you can, Stephanie.

    • Soporificat says:

      Yep. Agreed. I really don’t understand the people here saying that even though she got a bad deal that she should just give up and slink away. Yeah, she made a mistake in signing that pre-nup, and now she is trying to fix that mistake. Good for her.

      If she can break the pre-nup, and get something that is more within the realm of fairness for a 10 YEAR marriage, then good on her!

      I’m impressed that she has the strength to fight him because he comes across as aggressively mean-spirited. It must be incredibly stressful.

      • anon33 says:

        Why do people not understand that a contract is a contract? That’s why people are saying she should slink away…BECAUSE SHE AGREED TO THE DEAL.

      • Soporificat says:

        Deals can change when conditions change. Contracts can be, and not infrequently are, broken and renegotiated. This is true even in a business setting, much less a domestic situation. Bizarre that some here aren’t aware of this. I guess it is a lack of experience.

  14. Jenny says:

    He has mean eyes. You can tell so much about a person from their eyes, and his just radiate arrogance and rage. Pictured in sunglasses: looks kinda cute. Pictured without sunnies: looks like a raging bag of dicks.

  15. meme says:

    Steph, you married a FAMOUS acclaimed chef who’s a notorious player and has been married twice before. She didn’t make him famous or make him a great chef. Her lawyer should have told her not to sign that pre-nup if she was too stupid to realize how chintzy it was.

    • Anne says:

      That response is a bit harsh, in my view. I certainly agree that BF is a right ****, but I can’t blame a woman for being in love and not seeing that. “There but by the grace of God go I”, I say. We all want to believe in love when we think we’ve found it. I suspect his emotional disregard for her is what is fueling the fierceness of her financial demands, and also, I suspect, causing her a lot of pain.

      Godspeed to both of them in resolving this mess. Divorce is difficult.

      • anne_000 says:

        So the excuse is that she was too emotional and in love to be able to use her brain? Sounds like what many men would say about women during the suffragette days regarding voting rights.

        Would she have then signed just about anything? Would she have signed a $1 per month pre-nup? He could have put down any figure before her and she would have signed it?

        Why was $5,000 per month plus $1 million for her share of the marital home plus $50k moving expenses good enough when she signed it?

  16. Sahi says:

    Lol at her telling him not to talk to press.

  17. holly hobby says:

    If she felt so strongly about getting what’s due to her. she should have hired a good attorney to renegotiate the terms of the prenup before marrying him! Yes in comparison to his holdings, she is getting the short end of the stick but for $5K a month that’s nothing to sneeze at either. I’d rather get $5K a month over what I’m earning now!

    Right now she’s wasting her money on a losing case. Shame on her attorney for wasting her money.

    Looks like she cleaned up. She looks much better here than she did when they announced the divorce.

  18. Tiffany says:

    I thought that pre nups protected assets before the marriage. If assets were accrued during the marriage then she should be entitled to something. If she put her career on hold to help him but up a bigger brand and only wants to hold her to five grand a month, then I am glad she is not making this easier for him. Dude is a douche of the highest order.

    • anne_000 says:

      Then she should have demanded a consultant’s fee or salary if she thought her input was what made his fortune. Like I said before, does she NEVER think of her own finances or her own future?

      Her p.o.v. is making herself look weak. First, she’s too weak and stupid to ask for a better pre-nup to cover her future. Second, she gives out million dollar advice without any compensation, even if it’s just a powerless title or a small monetary fee.

      I just don’t have any sympathy for her.

  19. rose says:

    It doesn’t take a law degree to see that she can’t claim to have helped him with his career by tasting his recipes and commenting on them. She must be kind of dumb to think that would work in court. Just as she was dumb to sign a prenup that wasn’t giving her much.

    And she is just broadcasting how dumb she really is by playing this whole thing out in the media. Case closed.

  20. LL says:

    I love how people are calling receiving a MILLION DOLLARS (plus 60k a year) “impoverished.”

  21. Tori says:

    He sprung the gd prenup on her 3 days before the wedding. He knew what he was doing, the dirty douchebag. He’s the most dispicable type of person there is.
    (psst…this wasn’t her first public appearance. She made one the week before for her charity World of Children in LA looking hella hawt. Divorce is looking good on Ms. March.)

  22. FWIW says:

    Go Stephanie! So glad she is not taking it from Flay … She put up with enough cr*p through the ten years of marriage. Make him sweat it out because she is not the only one spending money on lawyers … he is too and I bet that is killing him. After the way he humiliated her throughout the marriage he should be trying to take care of her. But no. He has only cared about himself. What a greedy as*hole!

    If she loses any money at least she had the strength to speak up and expose him and, hopefully, she writes a book and tells all.

    IMO she did help his career in many ways.

    • Valois says:

      Why should he take care of her? She’s not a child. She should take care of herself.

  23. Jaded says:

    There appears to be no legal imperative that could give her a better settlement. Period. She signed the pre-nup apparently under no pressure. The fact that Bobby Flay is a notorious philanderer doesn’t figure into their divorce as far as what compensation she receives and she and her legal counsel are grasping at straws thinking they can wring blood out of stone by claiming illness, consulting with his menus, marketing his business, whatever. It’s called no proof.

    Flay is a horrible person by all accounts and if he had a moral bone in his body he’d give her a more equitable settlement, but she married him, was with him for 10 years, and it can’t come as a surprise that he’s a bottom-feeding, nasty piece of work who will do everything he can to negate her claims and give her only what she agreed to.