Chris Rock & Malaak’s divorce is getting messy over custody & money

Chris Rock

On Sunday, Chris Rock filed for divorce from his wife of nearly two decades, Malaak Compton. It didn’t take long for this battle to get sticky, although the original story rollout made the situation sound civil. E! says Chris and Malaak have been on the rocks for some time. They’ve been “having marriage issues for years” and were “living separate lives for some time.” Maybe there was some truth in that sketchy Star story from last year, which said Malaak was super controlling. But I’m sure Chris was no saint either.

Now multiple outlets say that Malaak prevents Chris from seeing their daughters.
Chris wants joint legal and physical custody of the girls, and Page Six says Malaak is gunning for sole custody (with no details on visitation). Chris “lives for his children” and says he plans his schedule around picking his girls up from school. TMZ got ahold of Rock’s divorce papers, which say Malaak rarely allows him to see the girls:

Chris Rock wants to make sure his now estranged wife doesn’t punish him for divorcing her … by keeping their kids away from him.

In his divorce docs, filed in NJ last Tuesday — and obtained by TMZ — Rock complains that Malaak has been preventing him from seeing their 2 daughters on a regular basis. He is asking for shared legal and physical custody of 12-year-old Lola and 10-year-old Zahra.

As for finances … Rock acknowledges they had a prenup when they married in 1996 — but says it’s expired because they’ve been together for just over 18 years.

The split has been in the works for at least a month. In the docs, Rock says back in November they identified all the community property to be split up once they divorce.

Interestingly … Rock points out Malaak has the “ability to work and contribute to her own support” — which sounds like he’s angling to reduce any spousal support payments.

[From TMZ]

If Rock’s statements are true, these are borderline claims of parental alienation and would explain why Chris filed. He and Malaak were already (unofficially) separated, and if she denied him access to his daughters, Chris needed to set some legal wheels in motion. The alimony stuff sounds like a nightmare to iron out with the “expired” prenup claim. It sounds like both players are playing dirty in this divorce.

OH. There are some dubious rumors that Chris got with his Top Five co-star, Rosario Dawson. Gossip Cop talked to Chris’ rep, who says the rumors are “100 percent untrue.” I doubt Rosario would hook up with Chris. They had crazy chemistry in the movie, but she’s a smart, practical girl who isn’t known for drama. Plus she just adopted a tween girl, which means she’s all kinds of busy and has no time for a married man.

Page Six say “Chris just wasn’t happy in the marriage anymore. There is no third party involved.” The Rock camp is also puzzled at how Malaak’s divorce statement to People went into unnecessary detail about her philanthropy.

Chris Rock

Chris Rock

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet & WENN

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

61 Responses to “Chris Rock & Malaak’s divorce is getting messy over custody & money”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. doofus says:

    if blinds are to be believed, there is a “reveal” that indicates that Mr. Rock was having a “relationship” with someone who was BORN AFTER HE GOT MARRIED.

    so, um…EW?

  2. bettyrose says:

    I know way more about CA family court than I’d like to. It’s pointless to seek sole custody unless one parent is truly unfit. Split custody is the default and seeking anything else is a waste of time and money – and hurtful to the kids – unless there’s a valid reason to deny one parent legal rights. Oh wait…not in CA. Well probably the same elsewhere. Dunno.

    • Ag says:

      it’s the same elsewhere. no judge in NJ will go for that, unless there are really extenuating circumstances, stemming from the idea that it’s best for the kids to have regular contact with both parents. esp in a case where, by all accounts, the dad is all about the kids. if his wife is engaging in any type of custodial interference, that’s really messed up and she needs to rethink her priorities. money is one thing, but one shouldn’t lose sight of the best interest of their kids.

      • doofus says:

        yeah, it happens all too often that the kid(s) become pawns in the parents “game” against each other.

        I have so much respect for parents that, though they may HATE each other, still try to give the kids good parenting and don’t let their hatred of each other affect the way they parent.

      • Ag says:

        @doofus – i do too. and, it’s heartbreaking to see the kids being used like that.

      • bettyrose says:

        Wait? You guys know my parents? They’re not celebs, but turns out money & fame are not prerequisites for childish behavior. 😉

      • Ag says:

        ha! i have seen too many people like that in my line of work. they’d argue over a stupid dog dish. so, yeah, money and fame are NOT prerequisites.

  3. OhDear says:

    Ooh, the poor kids.

    • Prettysmile says:

      I think is disgusting women who try to use their kids as pawns.

      • joan says:

        Well, you don’t know that’s true.

        And when she’s called “controlling” I have to wonder if that means she tried to CONTROL him not to HAVE AN AFFAIR.

        CONTROL HIM to be a good father instead of fooling around and disrespecting her and their kids.

        CONTROL HIM to stay home instead of out on the town.

        That kind of controlling.

  4. Bridget says:

    I think we all knew this one was going to get ugly. There’s just too much money involved and they’ve been together way longer than the 10 year mark (hello California!)

  5. Green Is Good says:

    Is anybody shocked that is getting ugly? Not me.

    • mata says:

      I actually was kind of surprised. She has always seemed pretty classy and they seemed to have a pretty solid marriage for most of those years. When I heard the divorce announcement, I guess I just assumed they would handle it quietly. I was wrong.

      • joan says:

        She does seem classy in interviews. And he’s always seemed kind of a little boy next to her, not comfortable with a grown woman.

        And away from her he’s made a lot of nasty comments about marriage that seem like he’s been having a a midlife crisis.

        Which is funny, because I love him and he has a ton of boyish charm, so the idea of a midlife crisis is odd when he seems so youthful.

  6. samanthalous says:

    I usually don’t side with men but really if these claims are true taking out your anger by preventing your kids from seeing their father is wrong. Also that statement that SHE put out was really stressing her philanthropy, well it is nice to give away your husbands paychecks where you see fit. I also do think Chris was tired for a long time, and someone just shouldn’t suffer to stay in a relationship that they don’t want.

    • Scarlett says:

      No doubt.
      I don’t care WHAT he did to you, give your kids access to their father. Sole custody is just being mean to your girls. And will surely give them issues to deal with the rest of their lives. Sad.

  7. Toot says:

    Chris is a known cheater and comes across as a jerk in some of his comedy routine, so if the wife was “controlling” she probably had major trust issues with him. Good luck to the girls.

    • Kitten says:

      Ok maybe but that doesn’t change the fact that one person controlling another is an unhealthy dynamic in a relationship. Seek marriage counseling or leave if your morals are being compromised, but trying to control and dominate can result in verbal and emotional abuse.

      Also, that kind of behavior tends to become cyclical in the sense that the controlled person builds resentment and tends to pull away–it never solves anything in the long run.

      • Supposedtobeworking says:

        Maybe it’s not so much controlling as setting firm boundaries?
        Akin to women being ‘ bitchy’ when they are assertive and mean when they are being a leader, Etc.

    • SteaminSam says:

      But the alleged infidelity/jerk behavior really has nothing to do with his relationship with his own children; it’s fine if his ex wants to take out her anger on him for his wandering eye (and erm, other parts) but not if she’s using HIS children to do so. They’re the ones who’ll be hurt by it most, not him.

      • aang says:

        The children are not HIS or HERS they are individuals with their own minds. I was younger than 10 when I decided I did not want to spend much time with my father. And it wasn’t because of what my mother said, but because of what I experienced and wittnessed. Trying to guess what is going on here is a waste of time. Things are not always as they seem.

  8. Scarlet Vixen says:

    I took her inclusion of her philanthropy in the statement as her wanting to say “I’m my own person & not just some freeloader who’s been sitting at home shopping while my husband got rich and famous.”

  9. Sullivan says:

    So, they are not Consciously Uncoupling?

  10. lisa2 says:

    I wondered about it all when she released a statement to People. Mainly because she is not the celebrity in the relationship. We don’t usually get We are Divorcing statements from the “non celeb”.. then Chris files for divorces and that is announced right after her statement. So yes things are not going to be clean cut. I don’t know how anyone can take side in this. It takes 2 to make a marriage and the work of 2 to unmake. There are problems and have been problems that we don’t know about. I don’t read blind items..they can be about anyone and when news breaks people run to match the news with the blind as if it was that way all along.

    Sad for their young children. But to me kids need to be in a home where the parents love and respect each other. Not in a home where either or both want out.

    • BengalCat2000 says:

      Those were my thoughts as well. I’m a huge fan of his and always thought he seemed like a great father. I hope their children aren’t subjected to too much turmoil. So sorry for them.

  11. **sighs** says:

    While I think he’s a cheater and probably not the greatest husband, I don’t understand why she’s trying to keep the kids away from him. It’s not their fault, they shouldn’t be used as pawns.

  12. Esmom says:

    I didn’t realize prenups expired. Seems like a like of hassle/potential angst to draw up such an agreement with only a limited shelf life.

    • FingerBinger says:

      Prenups can expire. It’s called a sunset clause.

      • Esmom says:

        Ah, thanks, I’m familiar with sunset clauses not related to prenups. That’s something that you would have to specify, not a given, I assume.

      • Bridget says:

        They’re also in California, where the 10 year mark on a marriage is considered a major milestone and means a much bigger payout. That’s why Rock strongly considered divorce in 2010600s – right before 10 years. That’s also why there was controversy with the breakup date for the Kidman-Cruise marriage – he tried to say it was weeks before they hit 10 years, she said it was afterwards.

  13. lisa says:

    i’m not saying it is the case here, but i have known a couple of women who tried to limit the father’s visitation because he turned them over to some young girlfriend and they were really the one who watched them while the father was out

    • GingerCrunch says:

      What a nightmare. My thought when people say how they’re all about the kids is why didn’t you work on your marriage for their sake? It’s undoubtedly hard being in a high-profile marriage like this one. But I am forever shaking my head over these poor children.

    • **sighs** says:

      That is a valid concern. He works a lot, so would the kids be spending time with him or with a babysitter or girlfriend? Not saying that would she is doing is right, though.

    • Yeah, that’s sort of what happened with my sister and my nephew. He dragged her to court for joint custody (when he hadn’t paid child support in 3 years), trying to act like she was keeping him from her (when it was that they lived in a different state with us)–so when he got it, every time my nephew went with him (for three days a week), he would either spend 90% of the time with his grandmother, or his ‘dad’ would bring him home by the next morning. I would be pissed if I had to spend all that time in court, spend all that time getting him ready, just for him to either not spend time with his dad, and/or come back home the next day.

  14. Jayna says:

    Pretty girls.

  15. scout says:

    Here we go.

  16. jenn12 says:

    Children are not pawns. I really hate people sometimes… as crazy as Courtney Love became, she used to be smart and articulate and I remember her once saying not to ever have kids with someone you could be repulsed by.

    • Yup, Me says:

      That’s an easy statement to make- not so easy to live by. Most people aren’t thinking about possibly hating someone one day when they’re marrying and/or having children with them. I had a friend who once said “Nothing can make you hate another person like having kids with them.” Becoming a parent means growing up and shifting priorities for some people. For others, it just means there are noisy little people in the house now.

  17. Kim1 says:

    He was the one who felt it was necessary to say HE filed for divorce. If he was classy he could have said we are divorcing in his statement.His people fed the stories to the media that she is controlling, she is keeping his kids from him, etc.
    Fact is he had to take a paternity test because his jumpoff got pregnant.He is a cheater.Now he is alleging she is a bad mother .

  18. ¡mire usted! says:

    Prenups expire? Yikes! I had no idea that could happen! This could get ugly. I wonder if another woman will pop up that will confirm overlap during their marriage. Or maybe she may pop up with another man. It happens. I hope not. I remember the rumors about a woman claiming she had a child with Chris. Chris completely denied it. You know this may be good old fashion – they just are happy anymore. It happens. Rosario? Ummm. I don’t see it but you never know. Chris is 50. He’s going through male menopause when they become very experimental with life.

  19. kri says:

    Damn. Sh*t just got real, as the great Martin Lawrence once said. I feel bad for the kids-he may have been a sh*tty husband, but I think he’s probably a good father. I also think he probably was cheating. I would say give her what she deserves after almost 20 years.She had his back all that time& raised the kids. I hate it when children get dragged by their parents.

  20. Crack Fox says:

    When I first heard the news, I jokingly thought Gabrielle Union had something to do with this since she has a one time rep of taking allegedly taking someone else’s man.


    She has a rep of fooling around with her male co-stars i.e. Denzel in Unstoppable (but not He Got Game), and the one that hurt me the most, The Rock in Rundown. I saw Rosario and The Rock at a promo even for Rundown and their chemistry made me seethe.

  21. jenn12 says:

    You should have written Malaak’s last name as well. It sounds like she’s an appendage he’s getting rid of. It’s not “Chris Rock and Malaak”; it’s “Chris Rock and Malaak Compton-Rock”.

  22. lrm says:

    I find it so unbelievable that men whose wives were dedicated to them, raised their children, helped their reputation and image, etc., become so hostile to their wives regarding spousal support, etc. I’ve seen it first hand with family members….And I just don’t understand why they think a spouse should not be entitled to ‘some’ of their ‘investment’. I mean, a marriage is a contract and a business, in many ways-whether partnership to raise children or otherwise…And most times in life, that partner helped you feel stable, gave you some sense of [possibly subconscious] security, helped your professional image, etc. That’s certainly true for Chris Rock and it’s true for many individuals not just celebs. Also, I cannot believe, after so many years, that a spouse wouldn’t want to ensure that their former partner was cared for. This just proves to me that it is a ‘legal contract’ in the minds of many and not something more human/emotional, for many people (and def. many men). I can understand being angry or bitter, but if you are the one who agrees you want out, and even file yourself, then let your partner share some of the comforts that were created while you were together. Geesh.

    That said, I remember seeing the wife on Oprah years ago, being interviewed and it was clear in that that this philanthropy thing was new to her and it was suggested [i think by chris himself] that she give something back, b/c she was very much about shopping and more superficial…so she began using her interest in style to create a program that provides makeovers to women in situations of need-ie, formerly abused, or getting back into the workforce, etc. So she has been actively invested in service and I certainly imagine that her releasing a statement including this info, is part of making sure the p ublic image of her is not just golddigger or making Rock’s life hard.

  23. Racer says:

    I will openly admit that when a relationship goes south I usually side with the man. Women are guilty until proven innocent. Men are not as complicated as women. Also women have this tendency to be really unhappy in a relationship and everyone has to pay for their misery. If a man cheats and you forgive him and stay, you don’t have the right to become controlling, make demands and set up obstacles so he can prove his love and trust. Men are very simple creatures. A bit foolish, but simple.

  24. tabasco says:

    Not saying Chris was a saint in his marriage – – I have no idea, really – – but I don’t think his comedy routines or movie content should be used as an indicator of his character or what he *really* thinks about things. Loads of comedians say stuff that has zero to do with their own beliefs/behavior. They’re not exactly looked to as the standard-bearers for putting out what is PC or “safe” or whatever. Chris once did a set about all the reasons OJ had to be pissed at his wife. He’d go “I’m not saying he should’ve killed her…….but I understand!” Some may not find it funny, but it hardly means, oh Chris Rock is down with murder.

  25. tabasco says:

    Also, I think Malaak is very pretty, but girl needs to fix her weave in that header pic.

  26. JenniferJustice says:

    His statement about her being able to contribute and support herself…hmmm. No judging here, just an observation, but spouses who are stay-at-home parents sometimes have trouble once all the kids are in school. Unless they are involved in outside activities, there is often a lack of stimulation and feelings of being lost which can cause all kinds of problems for both spouses.

    As far as custody issues, if Mallak has been preventing regular visitation, she better have hard proof to back up any claims she’d make to justify it. If a parent interferes with the other parent’s involvement with their kids and it is ungrounded (meaning there has to be proof of abuse or neglect), any decent judge in this day and age will force the offending parent to make up all lost time caused by their interference. A judge will also come down hard on the parent making any such false claims (assuming they can’t be established and we’re talking specific instances, dates and times, witnesses, etc.) I’ve seen mothers jailed for making false claims and forced to cede almost full custody to the father allowing all his lost time to be made up for. They will put mothers in their place now. Times have changed. There are activist groups like ADAM that will represent wronged fathers on a pro bono basis. Judges take it seriously and do not appreciate manipulations and lies. Malaak had better not be spouting vitriol w/out evidence. If she is making unjustified claims, it won’t be tolerated and she would be wise to not interfere and allow the courts to handle it. Any bitterness shown will only work against her.

  27. WordOfWisdom says:

    I have sole custody. My ex claimed “parental alienation syndrome”. Which is a term made up by some attorney and then used by more and more until it kind of became an accepted term. My attorney pointed out in court that the professional family therapists cringe at this “syndrome” and that was the end of that. If they each want custody the court will order an evaluation. The kids and both parents are interviewed, given psychological testing, observed at home interacting with each other, teachers and coaches are co tagged. This is not that BS mandatory meeting the court has on site, it’s done privately. Ours took 6 weeks and cost $12k. The results showed exact what was going on. You can’t fool the psych tests, and coaches and neighbors say things that they don’t even realize are connected.