Jeremy Renner & Sonni Pacheco finally settled their custody dispute


I guess it finally got as bad as it was ever going to get. It looks like Jeremy Renner and Sonni Pacheco have finally finalized their custody arrangement for their daughter, and are very close to wrapping up the terms of their divorce. Last week, we heard that Jeremy Renner’s “roommate” made a declaration to the court, saying that Sonni Pacheco was a terrible mother, that she drinks and does coke, and that Sonni only married Renner to get her green card. There were also claims that Sonni had comprising videos of Renner doing “something,” which Sonni was using to extort a better divorce deal for herself. All of this came after several months of rumors, court filings and public back-and-forth. It was turning out to be a significantly messy custody dispute. But now it’s over? Sort of.

Jeremy Renner and Sonny Pacheco may finally be able to enjoy their breakup in peace. The Oscar-nominated actor and his soon-to-be ex-wife have reached a custody settlement that entails Renner forking over $13,000 a month in child support for their 2-year-old daughter, Ava Berlin Renner.

According to court documents obtained Wednesday by E! News, Ava’s parents will share joint legal and physical custody.

Pacheco had been seeking a hefty hike in her monthly support payments, as well as primary physical custody of Ava; Renner had insisted on joint custody all along. His legal camp had also filed paperwork stating that by signing a prenuptial agreement before they tied the knot, Pacheco had waived her right to seek spousal support.

The settlement filing also stipulates that neither the Hurt Locker star nor Pacheco can “make derogatory or insulting remarks” about the other, a signiifcant other or either of their families in front of Ava. They’re furter restricted from “arguing, yelling or using profanity” directed at each other in front of their child. In addition to the $13,000-a-month and being asked to cover Ava’s health care costs in full, Renner has also been ordered to pay back child support, based on the new terms, of $21,035.

[From E! News]

People Mag also says that Renner still won’t pay any spousal support, just child support. We’ve heard that before about spousal support – Renner made Pacheco sign a pre-nup in which she gave up her right to spousal support no matter what. Still, $13,000 a month is pretty generous. That’s… $156,000 a year. She’ll be able to support herself with that. That being said, I doubt this is over. I feel like Sonni still has some tricks up her sleeve.


Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

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

76 Responses to “Jeremy Renner & Sonni Pacheco finally settled their custody dispute”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Marriage by contract with a license you have to renew every year. No more messy divorces. It would be a heck of a lot less hurtful than what goes on now. I feel bad for the baby, all these stories and speculation on the Internet forever. Being a kid is hard enough when your classmates know nothing about your home life; imagine the bullying she’ll get.

    • Greyson says:

      If that’s your view of marriage, then you’re better off not getting married at all.

      Marriage is supposed to be a lifetime commitment. Just because some idiots abuse it (in this case, she is a beard for a gay couple who wanted a child) doesn’t mean it should abolished.

      • WinterLady says:

        A relationship can be a lifetime commitment, if both partners want it to be. Marriage? Just a legal contract that is becoming obsolete, imho. A piece of paper does not a partnership make.

      • DaysAndNightsAndDays says:

        @ WinterLady

        Marriage is a relationship that is a contractual lifetime commitment. It provides a certain kind of stability as no partner can just decide to bow out on a whim.
        Some people need that and want that.
        Me as a woman would prefer marriage. Because life is still a lot harder for single mothers than it is for a married wife or a divorced mother who has the right to demand some significant support from her husband / ex-husband.
        And that is the reality of it.
        All this “I don’t need a marriage license to commit” is true but reality and statistics prove that a marriage license is the better idea to organise your future.

      • WinterLady says:

        Oh, I’m not against marriage per se. In fact, I am a fairly happy married woman myself. Now, do I need the marriage license to be happy with my husband? No. Does it give protection to women? I feel that is debatable, honestly. I’ve heard plenty of stories of women not being able to get support from there exes after a divorce. A deadbeat is a deadbeat, and will be a deadbeat with or without the marriage/divorce papers.

        I’m sure there will always be some form of contract to legalize relationships, I just feel that our idea of “marriage” is and will be changing in the future. It needs to be brought into the modern era.

      • aenflex says:

        The only reasons I got married to my partner were financial and insurance related. A ceremony and piece of paper does not a lifelong relationship make. As religion takes a backseat for these newer generations, there’s no threat of damnation or nirvana. Keeping that paper promise despite bitterness, resentment and general unhealth is no longer worth it, IMO.

      • DottieDot says:

        I am married because I am a Christian!

    • JWQ says:

      I like that idea! Also, if there are children involved, both parents should have custody by default unless one of them is violent/mentally ill or gives it up!

    • enike says:

      If marriage is just a piece of paper, don´t get married
      If you get married, then don´t blast the marriage as a piece of paper

      It is actually quite funny (well, not funny, but sad), that people, who are married not regard their marriage more then a piece of paper, and would preach here…

      again, if marriage is just a piece of paper for you, then dont get married, simple

      you can have a meaningful relationship without this paper—- if you need this paper for your security, then you relationship is not as secure as you present it..

      Either yes or no, simple
      You cant have it both ways – get married and then blast it – maybe you didn´t marry the right person—– and if you did, then why did you marry if the relationship is just as good without the paper? (to marry somebody for legal and tax reasons….. sorry, pathetic reason)

      • CatFoodJunkie says:

        Marrying someone for legal and tax reasons sounds fine to me. Which I did. The govt does not allow you to “pick” a person with whom you share medical or retirement benefits…you must be MARRIED to them. If they want to insist that marriage is the only true commitment, and it’s not “enough” to delegate a recipient to either your wealth (vis a vis the death and estate taxes), or health insurance, then so be it. Furthermore, the love of your life with whom you spent 30 years, say, is not entitled to your pension. Ever. UNLESS you were married. I am not a fan of marriage, but I am of commitment and loving relationships. Ive been married for 32 years now, and would have been content to have been a “girlfriend” for 32 years. A little piece of paper means nothing unless you need it to- emotionally or otherwise. When the day comes that the government allows you to delegate a financial “partner” (who reaps the same benefits as does a spouse), there will most assuredly be a lot less marriages.

  2. snowflake says:

    wow. that makes me sick, 13k a month for child support. she’s really cleaning up considering how long she was with him. talk about the american dream! bet she’s glad she came to the US.

    • seesittellsit says:

      Well, he knew what he was doing – he wanted a beard, he wasn’t too choosy about how he got one, he’s complicit in this, and the tragic thing is, everyone knows, anyway. I don’t think it’s the “American” dream – I think it’s the “wealth and easy life dream” and it’s hardly unique to America – do remember that the soon to be ex-Mrs. Renner is Canadian.

    • MrsBPitt says:

      You know, Snowflake, what you said it true…but, why are these men so stupid??? Did Renner REALLY think this young woman was with him because she loved him….and if the rumer is true, that he is gay, and wanted a baby, why not pay a surrogate to have a child for you…This happens ALL the time in Hollywood, older (or somtimes, just plain old) guy, dates 20 year old woman and she gets pregnant. Who is the stupid one!!! If he didn’t want to be paying child support for the next 18 years, he should have used a condom!

    • DaysAndNightsAndDays says:

      To put it bluntly:
      I see no reason why a rich man’s child should have to live in poverty.
      Additionally it is rather delusional to believe that a man can support his child without supporting its unemployed mother while the child is living with its mother. That is ridiculous.

      And no, I won’t call her a gold digger. Nor will I call Jeremy Renner any names and I could come up with a few.

      It is astonishing that the mother gets ripped to pieces for being a gold digger while the father is being pitied because the mother forces him to support her child and its mother.

      • WinterLady says:

        I don’t think there was really ever a chance Ava was going to live in poverty. At the least, Renner would have to pony up a few thousand. But 13k? Really? Most people would be happy to live on 3-5 thousand a month, and could do so pretty comfortably. Even without getting a job, if Sonni decides she wants to be a stay at home mom. But 13k a month is way beyond living comfortably.

        I’m an equal opportunity skeptic on this issue; I think what Halle Berry has to pay her ex a month is ridiculous as well, and they weren’t even married.

        Neither individual really comes out looking good in all of this.

      • Catk says:

        13k isn’t that much in LA. I don’t get why someone would think it’s fine that his child would be living on 3k a month when he had a home listed for 25 million. I don’t understand that mentality.

      • WinterLady says:

        Well, one would assume that Ava will be spending plenty of time in her dad’s mansion, so I don’t see what is wrong with her having to live the other part in a modest home/apartment. I don’t live in LA, so I don’t know exactly how much it actually cost to live there. I assume that it is pretty high, however does it really take 13k to live a middle-class existence month to month? Are there no cheaper suburbs of LA to live in? Or is 13k nothing in LA as for status standing?

      • PiecesofMe says:

        @DaysandNights–I am with you 150000%. 156K a year will provide the child with a comfortable, but not extravagant, life. If they were still living together as partners the child would go to very good schools, live in an exclusive neighborhood, live in a lovely home, be able to go to Disneyland, fly first class. Why punish the child because the parents cannot get along?

        If they have joint custody the judge looked at both their incomes when determining how much money should be for the child’s upkeep every month–he makes more than her, so he pays her. If she made more than him, she’d be paying him! As it should be. If he has a drastic reduction in income or circumstances he could ask for a review of the child support agreement and a judge would revise it (at least in MN–I have a friend whose ex thought he was paying too much in child support. They hadn’t gone through a judge when they first split, just sat with an arbitrator and agreed on an amount. When they went before the judge he ended up paying $200 more a month and he had to pay all the court costs and the judge reamed him for not taking care of his kid.)

        I’m not saying 13K isn’t a lot, it is. I just don’t think it’s outrageous based on his income and net worth.

      • Jellybean says:

        13K as a percentage of his current income seems quite low, I am predicting about 5%. I would say it is enough for mother and daughter to live quite comfortably in LA and I think it is fair – not my decision or his though, it is down to the court. Spousal support or a percentage of his assets would not be fair, especially if she was happy enough to wave all rights to them less than a year before filing for divorce. They both chose to marry, but they both signed an agreement as a condition for that marriage. Unless she has strong evidence of wrong doing then challenging the prenup is totally out of order.

      • Linn says:


        “Well, one would assume that Ava will be spending plenty of time in her dad’s mansion, so I don’t see what is wrong with her having to live the other part in a modest home/apartment.”

        Children can be pretty materialistic, so having one person be the cool parent who gives the child everything it wants, will it has to live a modest lifestyle with the other could cause problems.
        “Oh you have to share you bathroom with your mother? Here at my place you can have five rooms all for yourself and spent the summer lying at the pool. And why don’t you invite over all of your friends.”

        Even moreso if the “poorer” person does most of the hard work, while the richer is the “holiday parent” who takes the child to cool stuff like movie sets and can handle things less strict.

        I just hope that Sonni puts most of the money into the childs wellbeing instead of spending it on herself.

    • Dani says:

      Seesittellsit – I really don’t think he’s gay. I just don’t get the vibe. Because he has a male roommate? I know men in their late 30s still living with their ‘bros’.

      Mrsbpitt – I think it’s kind of rash to make a generalized statement that just because a woman is in her 20s doesn’t mean she can’t love someone older. I’ve always thought Sonny seemed sketchy from the beginning but age doesn’t really stop people in any other case.

      • Scotchy says:

        I agree with you Dani. I live in LA and I ran into the two of them together a couple of times at a blues night I used to frequent. They seemed pretty into each other at that time. He is a good actor, I doubt that good. She on the other hand.. well former models need to make rent somehow. Anyhow, my take is he fell in love, she got knocked up , maybe by accident maybe not. They tried to “do the right thing” and this is where they ended up. I feel for the kid.

      • Dani says:

        Exactly, Scotchy. Shit happens, somethings it works out and sometimes it doesn’t. But he being older doesn’t really make a difference.

      • Erinn says:

        Difference is – a lot of those men living with their bros aren’t married, and a lot of them are doing it to help split the bills. Jeremy was married and quite rich.

  3. Sabrine says:

    She’s set for the next 20 years at least. This one went tooth and nails, earning her gold digger stripes as quickly as possible, starting with a quick pregnancy to seal the deal. You’d think at his age he’d know the ropes how to prevent this sort of thing, but the main thing now is to provide two good homes for the baby.

    • Greyson says:

      Is it gold digging if the marriage was a contract so Jeremy could keep up appearances while starting a family with his partner/”roommate”?

      They both knew the score. From what the roommate said, I think Jeremy and the partner did not treat her well which is why she bolted.

  4. Lilacflowers says:

    May there be peace for Ava’s sake.

    But the most important question has yet to be answered. Who gets custody of the Cheez-its and Triscuits?

  5. Mia4S says:

    Basically the little girl has 50/50 time with her parents and will want for nothing and her mother will likely have to get a job and not sponge off a 10 month marriage?

    Yep, works for me.

  6. dr mantis toboggan says:

    Are we sure this dude wasn’t born with cretinism?

  7. Nessa says:

    Wrapped up just in time for Age of Ultron promotion. Goodness gracious, between this and the PR stunt that is the Evans/Collins relationship… Marvel has been busy!

    • Talie says:

      I highly doubt Marvel was involved here. They don’t want their action star to have a male roommate fighting with his ex-wife.

      • Nessa says:

        I think that there was probably some pressure so work this out before promotion. But I agree, Marvel wasn’t directly involved. I’m just glad it’s settled for the baby’s sake. Hopefully that was the greatest motivation.

  8. NewWester says:

    Why can’t Jeremy hold his own umbrella ?

  9. Talie says:

    I think publicly he has to say no to spousal support, but there’s no way he hasn’t given her a lump sum.

  10. Kaley says:

    People on the internet seem to love him but he seems like such a prick to me. And evidently not very smart and savvy in relationships either…

    • misstee says:

      I know – the casual misogyny up thread is breath taking. As if some pole dancing 20 year old party girl is the goddam Power Player in all of this.

      He messed up or he had a plan and it went wrong but not being tight fisted when he is a Millionaire would have saved his reputation. Who scrimps over a couple of thousand a month extra?

      • Except when you really dislike someone you’re probably not wanting to give money YOU earn so they can live off of you for the next 18 years. Yeah I can get why a millionaire like him might want to fight tooth and nail not to do that. I’d do it over $5, much less $13k.

        I couldn’t care less about anyone in this by the way. If it’s true that he is gay, that’s just sad that he can’t live openly. As for her, I always like a good golddigger but not one who has a kid and then spends her days partying while the kid is just left to do whatever. Both of them suck.

      • WinterLady says:

        Personally, I think both of them are skeevy. He is not bright at all, knocking up some 20 something he probably barely knew. Especially true if he is really in the closet and just wanted a baby, in which case he could have had one without a fake relationship.

        She seems like a thirsty gold-digger, a common breed in Hollywood. To her credit, she made out like a bandit in this scenario, so I guess she got what she came for. The only one I feel for is the baby, but at least she is surrounded by comfort if not common sense or class, I guess.

  11. The Original Mia says:

    Glad it’s settled. Maybe Sonni can disappear back into obscurity again. Jeremy & company should be here in Atlanta soon. If they aren’t already here.

  12. InvaderTak says:

    Well that was fast. Good news for the baby involved. Don’t care what the parents feel about each other, they need to get it together for the kid.

  13. Miss M says:

    Thank goodness, Renner got some common sense back and settled this. If they got 50-50 custody, I wonder who will stay with Ava when Renner is shooting a movie…

    • katy says:

      From what i gather she saw sense and settled, not him, this was the offer on the table from the start and probably what was agreed before they married. She wanted more than the 13K, wanted the pre-nup torn up and wanted primary, not shared custody. He kept quiet as she trashed him for 3 months and then last week he filed documents that basically said I will not be blackmailed, I will fight you tooth and nail for custody and I have much more on you that you have on me. I strongly suspect that negotiations involved laying out their evidence and she realized that if she wasn’t careful she would lose all custody and get deported. It isn’t all over yet, but I am pretty sure she is very disappointed.

  14. leahpet says:

    I think there may be another reason for the $13k per month. I saw a picture of baby Ava, and based on her facial features, I think she may have a genetic syndrome. Having something like that would require therapies, drs visits, special day care (if Sonni went back to dancing a pole, or whatever) and that can cost much more than what parents of typical children can even imagine.

    • Dani says:

      What??? I had to go and google the kid to see what you’re talking about. She seems like a totally healthy, normal child.

      • leahpet says:

        No, she has cranial-facial dysmorphic features. I won’t point out what they are publicly, because she’s not my baby. I will only say that, if you know what to look for, you will get what I’m talking about.

      • Erinn says:

        She looks completely normal to me. She actually looks a lot like him as a child.

        I really have no background to make the distinction, but there are very few photos of Ava, but child support is calculated based on earnings… so I really doubt that even if she does have a sign of a genetic disorder, that that’s why he’s paying 13k per month.

      • SamiHami says:

        I just looked up pictures of her. Her face is perfectly lovely and normal.

  15. DaysAndNightsAndDays says:

    Why should a rich man’s child live in poverty just because its parents got divorced? Bless Sonni for making Renner commit financially to the child’s upbringing.
    Who seriously believes that a man can support his child but not its unemployed mother? That is ridiculous.

    And why does Sonni get ripped to pieces for making Renner support his family? Because despite being divorced he is still the father of the child.

    • jammypants says:

      Well if it’s joint custody, she should also chip in her due. Exactly why is she unemployed? Personally, I don’t think it’s fair one side has to pay up when both parents share custody. I don’t care that he’s a millionaire. Now, I doubt she’ll ever make his salary but she should chip in whatever percentage it is from her own income as well. It’s only fair…oh wait she doesn’t work.

      • PiecesofMe says:

        Do you know that she isn’t chipping in her due?

        I don’t know exactly how it works in CA, but it can’t be that different from MN.

        [slightly simplified] In MN, they add the incomes and potential incomes of both partners. From there a total expected child support is determined. The parents portion is based on the custody agreement–50/50 custody would mean the expense is split evenly. Then their portion of the income is looked at. If he made 70% of the income, then he would pay her enough child support to get her to 50% of the expenses.

        I was actually surprised at the figure; I thought it would be higher and could only think that there were assumptions about her generating income and her portion of the child’s upkeep.

    • FingerBinger says:

      Who said the child was ever going to live in poverty? Renner didn’t want to pay spousal support. It didn’t say anything about not wanting to pay child support.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      I don’t think there was any doubt Renner would support Ava. He wanted full custody. She hasn’t made him support his daughter. She wanted him to support HER and she lost on that issue

  16. Kiddo says:

    Why does he always have Smelling-Rancid-Farts-Face?

  17. Dena says:

    1st – I don’t know how it’s done in CA, but where I live in MN the child support is calculator, plain and simple. It inputs your income, your ex-spouses income, what you each pay for daycare/health insurance, and spits out a number. So the amount she’s receiving may have nothing to do with greed, or wanting to sponge off him, but simple calculations typically done by a court.

    2nd – my ex fought me over an extra $20/month he’ll owe me (he makes six figures, I don’t) so yes, I could see them fighting over small amounts. Things can get remarkably petty.

    3rd – Some of y’all really need to check the sexism. It’s child support – for the child. I’ll receive more than I need but I also know that my ex has no intention of saving for our son’s college education, so guess where the extra is going? I’m also, frankly, going to use some of it to pay a cleaning service so I can spend more time playing with my son and not scrubbing toilets. It’s not our place to judge how a woman spends the money she receives, or what she does to maintain her mental sanity as a mother. I’ve noticed that any thread on child support can get really nasty, and I’ve even noticed that sexism coming out in how my ex and others talk about the money I’ll be receiving, and it really bothers me.

    • PiecesofMe says:

      Dena, I just saw your comment after I posted mine about MN child support! I have enough friends how have gone through the joint custody child support rigamarole to know that it’s quite a thing.

      And I have feelings about 3rd as well. No matter how much I may disagree with some of the choices she made in her life, she did not entrap him with her vagina dentata. He married her by choice, they had a child together, and now they have worked out an arrangement where they both contribute to the welfare and upbringing of the child they had together.

      • Jellybean says:

        I agree completely that it is unfair to criticize a former spouse for the amount set by the court. However, if they did have a prenup and an agreement to share custody, then trying to overturn that after 10 months without excellent reasons is deplorable and shows no consideration for the child. Clearly there were no compelling reasons to grant Sonni primary custody and I guess we will have to wait and see on the prenup.

      • Dena says:

        @Jellybean, I could be wrong, but I don’t think custody is typically established in a prenup. I agree, if they’d previously discussed custody and she tried to go back on it without good reason, that would be deplorable. But I was only speaking to the custody piece of it, not the prenup.

        As to compelling reason to be granted primary custody…it’s insanely hard to get these days, even with documentation and evidence. I know I, personally, tried to get more custody because my ex travels a lot for work and I knew that if we had 50/50 officially I’d still end up with my son a lot more than that. (he’s already going to be gone two weeks out of the next six). Because of his travel schedule I can’t take a second job to pay legal bills, etc., and I’m basically free drop-in childcare (we have no local family). Please note, I don’t mind watching my son, but there are financial considerations involved and I’m supporting my ex’s continuation in a lucrative career and making this travel possible. I imagine Sonni might have been trying to make the same argument.

        I definitely think the pre-nup should be upheld.

      • Jellybean says:

        Hi Dena

        All the points you make are valid and I fully understand why you would need additional support. In Renner’s case he wouldn’t need her to watch the baby, he employs a nanny and most of his very large family live near by in LA, including grandma and two sisters with young children of their own who I have no doubt would be there to help.

  18. Jellybean says:

    I don’t think there was any question that Renner could fight the level of child support, that was always going to be set by the courts, regardless with what was in the prenup. The issue was that Sonni was going for primary custody which would have given her more child support, plus wanting to trash the prenup, presumably so she could get her hands on his considerable assets. I am assuming that she backed down when she realized that he would stand up in court and fight her on who was the most fit parent. I am glad for the daughter’s sake that didn’t happen, but it should never have got that far and I strongly suspect that an agreement on 50:50 custody was part of the prenup.

  19. Ferdinand says:

    This message coming from a country where we get paid per day and not hourly as in the states. I have no idea how much a regular person earns per month. So help me out and only to give myself a clear idea. How much can a person with a “regular / normal” job make in the states.

    13k sounds a Lot to me. Then again, I’m not From the states and we do not have “spousal support” either. If you get divorced here in Mexico and you have children, you get a part of your paycheck deducted according to the number of children you have. But you have no obligation to support the ex-wife/husband.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      13k a month is a lot but it is based on a percentage of his earnings and it is meant for the care of the child

  20. Tiffany says:

    So will the support be tax free. Let’s say Sunni does not get a job and her sole income is the CS, does she still file a 1040 at the end of the year. Does the government not get anything. Because if there is no tax on it 156,000 tax free is a nice chunk of change.

  21. Mispronounced Name Dropper says:

    Drinking and doing coke in and of itself does not make someone a bad parent. If the substance use causes the parent to neglect or abuse the child then that’s a problem. But to assume someone is a bad parent simply because they use substances is intellectually lazy and bigoted.

  22. lily says:

    Is his bitchface photo for real or a scene in a movie?

  23. Jen says:

    He can NOT think it’s normal to say you are 40 years old and have a flippin roommate. Who is he kidding??

    • Elle says:

      Renner and his entire family clearly think of Winters as a brother / son / uncle. That might be strange in my family, but he has 6 younger siblings already and In his last interview Renner said most of them have now moved to LA with their familes and I get the impression they have kind of grouped together. Renner also seems to have a big group of close, loyal friends, including Winters, that he met when he first came to Hollywood more than 20 years ago and who seem to be his Hollywood family. So in that context Winters living in the guesthouse isn’t so strange, especially when you consider how much Renner works away and that they co-own the house. So is co-owning the property strange? They are both rich now but they lived in poverty until their early thirties when they pooled their money and bought an apartment. They then got rich by roughing it whilst fixing up one co-owned property after another. So basically this is not just a rich man living with a roommate, there is a huge amount of history and a very strong commitment to family underpinning it.