Christine Baumgartner charged a forensic accountant to Kevin Costner’s credit card

I’m lowkey obsessed with Christine Baumgartner these days. Christine filed for divorce from Kevin Costner in early May, in what was apparently a total shock to him. It’s looking more and more like Christine only filed for divorce when she had all of her ducks in a row – this wasn’t done on a whim, this wasn’t half-assed. She has a divorce lawyer and she’s listening to everything the lawyer is saying, that’s what it sounds like. In the six weeks since she filed for divorce, Christine has not moved from the $145 million Carpinteria, California home she shared with Costner. While the home is in his name alone (he purchased it years before they married), that’s the home where Christine has been raising their three minor children. Costner has gone to court to evict Christine and force her to adhere to the terms of their 2004 prenup. Christine is saying nuh-uh, not so fast. The Daily Mail had even more about the situation, including a hilarious detail about Christine using one of Kevin’s credit cards to charge for a forensic accountant. ‘Atta girl!!!

Kevin Costner’s divorce from estranged wife Christine Baumgartner just got explosive, with claims that star is now ‘homeless’, she splurged $95k on his credit card and has a restraining order against him. In court papers seen by the actor’s lawyers claim that they have made ‘multiple offers’ to get his wife to move out of the former marital home – but have failed to reach agreement with Christine, 49. a model turned handbag designer, leaving him effectively homeless.

Costner, 68, remarks: ‘this is surprising and disheartening to me.’ He adds: ‘I was married once before and, upon separation, found myself without home base and unable to live in my own home. I never wanted this to happen again. ‘

Costner is worth $250 million and under the terms of the prenup, signed in 2004, she was to leave his properties if they split and relocate, using a $1.2 million fund to find a new house. Costner alleges that she is in breach of that agreement – saying that he now wishes to move back into the huge house which they shared. She was spotted at the property yesterday.

The lawyers said: ‘ What is happening now is exactly what he and Christine contracted to avoid in the event their marriage failed. Christine has accepted the benefits of the PMA (pre marital agreement ) over the years, but now refuses to accept this one burden’.

Both sides seem to be preparing for a ‘War of the Roses’ style legal battle over their huge $145 million house in Carpinteria, California. It is owned solely by Costner and he bought it in 1988, long before their 2004 wedding. Costner, filming in Utah for the past few months, is complaining that he needs a home as he will be off location from early June. Extraordinarily, he says that he was made homeless during his last divorce. The house next door, also owned by him, is used he says as a place to edit films.

Costner alleges that following their separation she ‘charged $95,000’ to his credit card ‘without prior notice to me.’ That money was spent on lawyers and on a forensic accountant.

Meanwhile Costner claims she wants the world to see the financial details of the pre-nuptial agreement which they signed. He says that would put him under risk of ‘irreparable harm’ from fraudsters or burglars, and be likely to attract unwanted and embarrassing global media attention.

[From The Daily Mail]

Please, this is hysterical. Kevin Costner is an idiot. All he had to do was be the bigger man and treat his estranged wife – and mother of his three youngest children! – with respect, and none of this would be in the public sphere. Costner is the one running to court, crying about how he’ll be HOMELESS. Dude owns plenty of other properties, including the house adjacent to the family home Christine is apparently now squatting in. I have no idea if Christine’s endgame is to get that house in the divorce, but it’s asinine for Costner to demand that Christine move out immediately, before they’ve even BEGUN to negotiate the terms of their divorce. The thing about the forensic accountant is f–king gold too – what a self-own for Costner to admit that in court documents. “Your honor, she charged a forensic accountant’s services to my credit card when I was trying to financially screw her over and hide my assets!!”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

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

127 Responses to “Christine Baumgartner charged a forensic accountant to Kevin Costner’s credit card”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. girl_ninja says:

    Terrible man. I knew he was a cheater in his first marriage but he’s worse than that…he’s an abuser. Like Pitt and Depp. I hope Christine gets through all of this with her children safely.

    • AlpineWitch says:

      I think he’s even worse than Pitt/Depp as they’re publicly two messes but Costner has a wholesome image, which makes everything more insidious and awful.

      Seriously, he thought to give her 1.2 million and that’s it? An amount of money without any reasonable adjustments for inflation and length of marriage? He’s petty, vindictive and a 1st level ahole.

      I used to have his poster on my bedroom’s wall when I was a teenager but my blinkers fell off when he divorced Cindy.

      And homeless… hahahaha not because he got a divorce, he sunk himself with Waterworld….

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        I’ve never thought of Costner as wholesome. He’s always seemed too full of himself.

      • BeanieBean says:

        I thought that homeless remark was more in the way of an explanation for this particular clause in this prenup–that his first divorce left him ‘homeless’ (please, he’s stinkin’ rich, even then) & he wanted to ensure it wouldn’t happen to him again. He’s totally OK with it happening to his ex & kids, apparently. And the Mail’s framing the $95k credit card charge as a ‘splurge’ is ridiculous. She hired lawyers & a forensic accountant! That’s not a splurge! It’s a legit expense!
        Oh, and didn’t we learn yesterday that Costner owns three houses? How exactly is he ‘homeless’?

    • ML says:

      Tbh, I don’t know if Costner is physically as abusive as Pitt and Depp, but for the rest this totally tracks. His response to Christine was not PR savvy. Forcing out his longtime wife within a month? In a market where housing is at a premium? After he said he didn’t want to be divorced? And stating he now wants that house and otherwise he’s homeless? Dude! How long before before he hires that creep who’s behind Pitt’s and Depp’s image rebuilding?

      • JM says:

        I can’t believe that he’s throwing around the word homeless. In the middle of an actually housing crisis across the country. He better pay his PR agent overtime because he is clearly a nightmare. I hope Christine gets everything.

  2. Bee says:

    “Homeless” really? Doesn’t he have three or four other houses? Ridiculous. Homeless is when you lose your ONE home. Kevin needs to have a seat. Or get a refrigerator box and really lean into it.

    • Isabella says:

      Bizarre to me, when she’s raising his 3 kids. Where the hell are they supposed to live? With him? Wow. What a jerk.

    • AD says:

      It doesn’t matrer if you have 3 or 4 homes. That home is considered his primary residence. It’s where he gets his mail and lives majority of the time.

      Christine is making a lotta noise to get more out of the settlement which she can by way of the children but if that home is in the prenup she is going to have to move eventually. Prenups are mostly iron clad. At this time no lawyer will advice her to move but eventually she will.

      • BeanieBean says:

        Or, you know, he could move into the house next door that he already owns. That would be way less disruptive to his kids, as well as his ex.

      • JM says:

        It actually does matter

      • Mallory says:

        You are forgetting about the most important piece here- three minor children. It’s their home too & has been their entire lives. Where he gets his mail is bs compared to where they go to sleep while he travels the globe.
        What is best for the children should be what everyone is focused on & can trump a prenup. If she is the primary caretaker, why uproot them all suddenly & send the kids to a new home?!
        He’s a trash husband and a trash father. If he finds a fridge box, can someone please steal it in the night?

    • Minnieder says:

      @bee Dying over the refrigerator box advice 🤣🤣🤣

    • Sandy says:

      I had a friend sign a pre-nup and marry, then he fell for another and they divorced and she got nothing but a little 401k $
      Why do women sign these things?

      • Lens says:

        Women (and men by the way) sign prenups because that’s the only way their soon to be spouse will marry them and at the time they are madly in love, can’t imagine ever divorcing and really want to be married, with the security that comes from that. But really Kevin that house buying amount of $1.4M you negotiated in 2004 would give your ex and three children a teeny, tiny bungalow in 2023. Not fair.

      • maisie says:

        A teeny, tiny bungalow far from the “good” part of Carpinteria.

        Costner has always been a massive tool. Years ago a friend of mine sent her kids to the same school as Costner’s oldest kids. He showed up at sports events and school functions, but whenever the parents of other kids said hi or attempted to exchange pleasantries, he’d stare them down then look away. He was far, far too pretty to talk to the peasants (in the same upper middle class north LA community in which he grew up).

    • The Recluse says:

      He could end this up pretty fast, if he just renegotiated with her and gave her a fair settlement to live on in that area. Inflation is a thing, dude.

      • Deering24 says:

        The Recluse–unfortunately, guys like him put money above. Everything. Else. A sound solution to them sounds like surrender–which their ego cannot take.

  3. Bingo says:

    Years ago I worked for a forensic accountant that worked on high-level matrimony cases. You have no idea the lengths men would go to. To hide their money from their wives. My boss would suss it out like a bloodhound. Forensic Accountants don’t mess around.

    I honestly thought this was just a move like Jennifer Flavin did to bring Stallone back in line with her filing and pulled it.

    I think Christine is actually done with him.

    • Torttu says:

      That sounds like a cool job! We need a forensic accountant tv series!

      • Pix says:

        I would totally watch that show! (Just don’t cast Kevin Costner!) 😆

      • EB says:

        I would totally watch that show!

      • Shawna says:


      • B says:

        They need to cast discount Kevin Costner as Bevin Nostner and then roast the hell out of him.

      • Mallory says:

        Joining the choir & would watch!

      • Deering24 says:

        Eheheheh. A close friend is a retired forensic accountant, and he noted that after a while, the craziness and straight-up evil mess people go through to hide money just gets to you. I always rib him he could have been hired by the Feds to work on Trump’s various illegalities. 😂🤣🤣

    • Matilda says:

      Many years ago my aunt went to work as a CPA in a prestigious accounting firm in Washington DC. She left in disgust after 6 months as she realized it was a firm to help men hide money from their wives and the government. Two of my friends who divorced during the pandemic both hired forensic accountants (almost as much as the divorce lawyer) and both said it was well worth it as both husbands were not only hiding assets, one of my friend’s husband had her sign documents that made her financially liable for three million dollars worth of taxes (never sign anything without reading it, even if your husband gives you the paperwork). So hopefully Christine will get what she deserves and his unfair prenup is at least seen to be unreasonable and unfair.

      • Bingo says:

        @Matilda that was a big reason why I quit also. I got so sick of seeing the worst in humanity on a daily basis. On top of the money, it got worse when NEITHER side wanted custody of the kids.

        And I would totally watch a Forensic Accountant TV show!

  4. Nixie says:

    I never knew he was such an ass. Good to know, I guess. Petty and spiteful. Like was he even home enough to be this butthurt?

    • Lilly (with the double-L) says:

      Yes, he’s really showing his whole azz and it is good to know. Plus Nixie I love “butthurt” as a descriptor. Lol.

  5. Seraphina says:

    He said some terrible things about his first wife so this does not surprise me. How can he be so cruel to the woman who not gave him three childre, but was also married to him for years. It is good she has her ducks in a row, And as far as his claims of having been, and being homeless, he needs to apologize to all those who are homeless. He has no clue and the “poor little rich old man” cry is old and stale like him.

    • EllenOlenska says:

      His first wife worked her butt off to support him when they got married long before he “ arrived”. He lost me on that divorce and I had been a big fan. I’m not a Christine fan but heck lady, go get it.

      • Seraphina says:

        I was a teenager when he divorced his first wife and he said something to the effect that he was no longer attracted to her or something like that. That’s when I learned, attractive men can be ugly on the inside and mean. There was no reason to be so blunt in public and on record.
        I am no fan of Chritine’s either, but I agree – go get what you can.

  6. Flower says:

    I can see why she has employed a Forensic Accountant bc the Maths isn’t mathing….

    Kevin Costner is believed to be worth $250 Million yet :

    “…. Christine has not moved from the $145 million Carpinteria, California home she shared with Costner.”

    We’re also told he has two other homes not to mention other assets, cash, stake-holdings in businesses and his contract for yellow stone.

    I think Christine and her Lawyer may be onto something. Also in what world do you live in a $145M home whilst your children live in a $1M home (if that is even possible in LA close to their current schools and friends ?).

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      Please note he’s not requiring the children to move out of the $145mil home…just their mother and primary caregiver…which makes his demand that she move even more offensive.

      The whole thing stinks to high heavens and I hope Christine nails his ass to the wall and walks away with her fair share.

      • Flower says:

        He’s going to have a hard if not impossible time getting custody given the amount of time he spends away from home.

        All Christine needs to do is pull up his schedule and any fight for full time custody would be toast.

  7. Heyhey says:

    I think he’s also forgetting that it’s 2023 not 1993. Get. It. All.

    Still, won’t someone think of poor Kevin? He’s homeless, y’all.

  8. Flower says:

    Jeez – he’s really not helping himself here….

    “Costner alleges that following their separation she ‘charged $95,000’ to his credit card ‘without prior notice to me.’ That money was spent on lawyers and on a forensic accountant.”

    ^^ Such an interesting thought process here. Just goes to show that for all these years they haven’t been partners, rather Christine and her children have just lived with him. He ‘allowed’ her to have her children as a concession but never really regarded her as a life partner.

    “Meanwhile Costner claims she wants the world to see the financial details of the pre-nuptial agreement which they signed. He says that would put him under risk of ‘irreparable harm’ from fraudsters or burglars, and be likely to attract unwanted and embarrassing global media attention.”

    ^^ Going to guess that the pre-nup contains detailed plans of the properties he owns, which could easily be omitted in discovery for security reasons. It’s the latter half of that last sentence that is just pitiful. He clearly understands that the pre-nup was never fair to Christine and retrospectively after 24 years and 3 children he will look like a tight fisted cruel clown. There might also be stipulations re her ‘duties’ as a wife i.e. not allowed to work, prioritising his ‘needs’ etc etc

    This whole situation is giving older guy with greater economic bargaining power who exploited a younger woman for her beauty, but unlike other transactional narcissists, he didn’t want to pay to play.

    He needs to sit down and get to negotiating and offer Chistine $50-60M and move on with his life. She is worth it.

    In any case his next partner will be 25 again and he’ll likely “expire” on her so where’s he taking all that money to ?

    • Concern Fae says:

      I remember reading back in the day (90s) how terrible Hollywood prenups could be. They’d have clauses about gaining weight, how quickly baby weight would have to be lost, approval for drastic hair cuts, even how much sex could be specified. This may have been exaggerated, but there were lawyers quoted, so it was probably extreme but not unheard of.

      If Costner felt so burned by his first divorce, it’s likely there is some pretty awful stuff in that pre-nup that he doesn’t want made public in 2023. On the other hand, he’s now marketing himself to the red state rubes, so maybe he’s going to argue that this is what every husband should be doing.

      You all do realize that the fringes of the right wing, the podcast guys and such, are starting to push back against no-fault divorce? Costner could take the lead

      • Flower says:

        This is exactly what I was referencing – i.e. what FAFO is about to be exposed by those stipulations ?

        But why would he push back on a no fault divorce in his case?

        He’s the one who would likely be implicated, thereby making it easier for Christine to get a divorce.

        Also why would anyone push for the walking back of no-fault divorces ? Do people just love misery ?

      • Worktowander says:

        Re: No-fault divorce: 70% of U.S. divorces are initiated by women.

        In other words, they are fine with WOMEN’S misery, as long as it keeps the wimmen home with the men they hate – where they belong. /s

        Taking down no-fault divorce is the next battleground to send women back 100 years.

      • OperaCake says:

        They don’t want women to be able to leave men.

        Just googled, this article for example explains: “Unlike anything else in the 19th century, divorce allowed women to disrupt their otherwise secondary status in society. And it is precisely this discomfort over women’s autonomy that continues to fuel conservative outrage over the matter. In present day, divorce can be a remedy to anyone. But it’s because of its potential to benefit women that it arouses controversy. “

  9. HeyKay says:

    Ha! Let’s go with all the details LOL. He is an idiot if he thinks her lawyers are not going to make every detail public. Go ahead, do it.
    If he wanted privacy he should have had his lawyers make her a decent offer while they are still in process of the divorce. Or simply let her and the kids stay until after the finalization.

    She got a restraining order against him?
    Is that to be sure he doesn’t show up at the house and try to manhandle her physically to get her out?

    His PR team is tired already. LOL.
    Keep the details coming, I’m ready.
    He really is a jackass!

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      “His PR team is tired already.”

      Kevin will waste a boatload of money on PR and lawyers just to try to avoid paying a fair amount to the woman who gave birth to three of his children and kept his home life running smoothly so he could focus on his work.

  10. Val says:

    Im not saying I like the man or he’s not trying to hide assets – I have no freaking clue either day.
    But if they had a prenup with set terms, she should follow them. I don’t get why everyone is on her side on this. It’s his home, he bought it decades before he married her, so with money he made before she came around. She should move out. And she shouldn’t be charging HIS card to pay for her divorce defense.
    Again, I’m not arguing he’s a good person or whatever, so don’t come at me. But a prenup is a prenup, it’s an agreement to be honored.
    Am I missing something?

    • Rapunzel says:

      Yes, Val. You are missing that they were married nearly 20 years and she deserves her share of the household assets. It’s called community property. There’s no his or hers in marriage. It’s ours. End of.

    • Moxylady says:

      Yes. A pre nup signed almost 20 years ago should have a sunset clause which takes into account the amount of time married, children and inflation among a million other things.
      You don’t still work off the same contract you were hired under 20
      Years ago.
      Wills get updated as your assets increase.
      Same with prenups.

    • Kokiri says:

      Well, since you asked.
      You’re missing your compassion & empathy for a woman who is being financially abused by the man she is trying to leave.
      “A pre nup is a pre nup”, is so basic a way to think I worry for you. Seriously.
      Do some work on your internalized misogyny, Val, or if you are a guy, shame on you for even suggesting Christine is somehow wrong here.

      • Kokiri says:


        Girl. Please.

        If you cannot see how the very beginning of this pre nup situation is based in raging misogyny, I don’t know what to tell you.
        He used his prior divorce to justify his current terms, & is again invoking that divorce to justify evicting his wife & mother of 3 (3!!) children. In the press. Like he’s a victim of these women taking advantage of his generosity.

        You can hide behind “she signed it” all you want, we al know how rich men take advantage & now look: he’s dragging the mother of his kids in the press and you’re like “she signed it!!”

        Do the work. Find out why you are so quick to rely on this sol called “pre nup” as the be al end all here.

        ETA: this posted in the wrong place. Hopefully Val sees it.

    • Shawna says:

      I doubt that the prenup says that she has to move out the moment she files for divorce. They are not yet actually divorced.

      • Val says:

        I have zero internalized misogyny. I just look at it as they had an agreement and her just refusing to follow it stinks in my opinion. Move out and work on your defense to negotiate what you feel you deserve after 20 years, sure. But refusing to leave a house he purchased long before he even met her just stinks. If it had been money earned during the marriage, by all means, she’s entitled to half or whatever. But it’s not. I have plenty compassion for a woman trying to get out of a marriage that wasn’t working but the prenup is a legally binding document. She should follow it until her divorce attorney can negotiate a better – updated – deal.

      • H says:

        The prenup stated that Christine had 30 days to vacate their home after she filed for divorce. 30 DAYS! With 3 minor children.

        I never liked Kevin as an actor nor do I watch Yellowstone. But if he doesn’t handle this the right way he’s going to come out like a jerk in the press (it’s already started).

      • Shawna says:

        @H – thanks, I missed that. That’s an insane clause!

    • SquiddusMaximus says:

      If she moves out of that property, she’s legally viewed as having abandoned it and has absolutely no right to it. Smart. Even if it’s a legal loophole to give her greater leverage.

      My dad pulled a similar stunt with my mom right before they divorced. He had a psychotic break and we (myself and siblings) pretty much forced mom to stay with relatives because we were worried he’d kill her. But the very fact that she left the house gave him grounds to say she abandoned it, and he could lay claim to everything in it.

      She still ended up with 50%, but was living in a cheap 2bdrm apt until all details were settled (2 yrs later), while he was shacking up in the $2mill house with his new girlfriend.

    • Lucy2 says:

      Val, I’m thinking the same thing.
      I think he’s an ass, and I hope she gets a fair settlement when all is said and done, but if she signed a prenup, I’m not sure why she thinks she can change the terms of it now. Perhaps it had some language about changes after so many years of marriage have passed, but who knows until if and when it’s made public.
      If that house is in his name only, and in the 20 years of marriage that never changed, I can’t really see how she has claimed to it.
      I’m disgusted by him using the term homeless, he has millions and millions of dollars and can stay at any fancy hotel or rent or buy a house or stay in one of his many other properties. He’s not homeless, and it’s awful for him to say that he is.

      • Rapunzel says:

        Lucy- she can lay claim to it because she married him for nearly 20 years and raised his 3 kids in the house.

        I swear, your and Val’s comments make me despair for the both of you. You clearly do not understand what it means to give 20 years of your life to someone. And 3 kids. That is a life together. That means community property. Only a true a-hole plays it like this. You don’t just kick someone like that out of a house you aren’t even using.

      • Rapunzel says:

        Lucy, you and Val clearly don’t get what it’s like to give decades of your life to someone. That means something. It deserves “our” not “mine”

      • lucy2 says:

        LOL no need for despair for me.
        As I said, she absolutely deserves a fair settlement – for 20 years of marriage, and child support, alimony, and 50/50 of anything they purchased together. No question.
        But regarding the house, I’m looking at it legally – a pre-nup is a binding document, as is the deed to a home.
        Pre-nups don’t expire, but it’s possible there’s a sunset clause, or they updated it throughout their marriage. As I said, we don’t know, unless that document is made public. I would hope she had good counsel at the time of their marriage and throughout, and had those clauses in there, but all the info we have right now is that there was a pre-nup that spelled out specific things regarding that house. So if that’s the current agreement, she’s not going to end up with that house. I’m sure her lawyer has told her to stay put and not vacate, which is smart to do right now, but again, if the prenup states that it’s his, and his name only is on the deed, she’s not going to end up with it. That doesn’t mean I think she should be kicked out immediately or get nothing at all, but she’s not going to get that house, unless something in the documents changed.

      • Shawna says:

        But we don’t know if she’s laying claim to the house. We only know she isn’t moving out immediately. As I said above, surely the prenup doesn’t say “the second she files for divorce, she needs to move out.” They are still married.

      • Kkat says:

        If she leaves the house, it’s only stipulated she leaves, not the kids, she will be legally abandoning the home AND the children.
        The absolutely LAST thing you do in a custody case is leave the children or primary home the kids are living in.

        Every divorce attorney will tell you to never leave until the judge orders something.

        So the women? here saying she should obey and just leave are either being incredibly naive, or definitely are showing their internalized misogyny.

      • Mrs. S says:

        I’m with you guys. Everyone cheering her on saying she has her ducks in a row, well, what about the duck that needed to find somewhere else to live? That’s not her house. I’ve been married for as long as them, and my house is MY house if anything were to happen to my marriage. It was mine before him, and will remain mine.

        Also, compare the comments of get it girl, take it all, she raised his kids, etc to comments on say a K-Fed post. Seems K-Fed should take Britney to the cleaners and take her house, too. i just can’t with the double standard.

      • The Old Chick says:

        Seriously, you can pick his pr team a mile away. Trolling the blogs with the ‘I don’t like him but’ comments. Exactly like derangers do, btw. Spot it a mile away. No one with an ounce of humanity would double down on a poorly designed prenup when Christine was young and marrying someone with all the power (though a well known cheat and his wife had supported him financially). 20 years later things have changed. Costner pr trolls it’s not working and you’re making it worse not better.

    • AnneL says:

      They have three children. She is expected to move them out of their home into a place that will almost certainly be in a different area (away from school and friends) and not nearly as large or nice? What, so he can live in their current multi-million dollar all by himself? Even though he literally owns the house next to it as well, as well as other properties?

      The fact that he even still wants or expects her to do this is gross. The kids need to stay in that home more than he does. He’s away filming a lot of the time anyway.

    • Jayna says:

      Oh, I don’t believe she should get the house. I don’t think she wants it either. $145 million piece of property should not be hers. BUT she shouldn’t have to pick up and leave right away, and I agree with others that her staying is helping to push through a divorce settlement. She should not have to abide by all of the prenup. They had three childen after the marriage. He is mega wealthy. He easily could agree to pay cash for a $10 million dollar home in that area for her to continue to raise the children. Easily. And it could be part of their divorce settlement. Or give her a big lump-sum settlement for her to buy a very nice home and then he pays child support and all of the kids’ expenses.

      That is a drop in the bucket to him. She was his wife for a long time, and the children are not going to be required to move into a teeny-tiny home with their primary parent.

      Simon Cowell did not marry Teri Seymour. They lived together and she broke up with him. When he and Teri broke up (no kids, no marriage) in 2008, he bought her a $4.6 million home. He didn’t have to. And she has a career. For Mezhgan, who was his fiancee for a couple of years no children), he gave her in 2011 a $6 million home after he broke up with her. For all of Simon’s faults, he is very generous.

      Now, stack that up against Kevin who wants Christine and the kids out immediately and is being insulting regarding the $1.45 million to get a home for her and the kids. He shouldn’t have released that information as it makes him look like a bad guy. Because everyone knows that that gets Christine and the children nothing.

      I understand he is not happy about being blindsided by her taking quick action and it can be a little ugly at first, but Mr. Mega Wealthy ($250 million net worth) knows full well she will be getting more than the prenup states regarding a family home for the kids to grow up in.

    • Eurydice says:

      There are certain parts of California divorce law that supersede prenups – like issues about the children, custody, support, etc. If she wants custody of the children, then she’s going to want to stay in the house with them until everything’s settled.

    • Flower says:

      I am going to guess that he’s trying to keep the prenup sealed and instead going down the road of increasing the child support payments as they’re all essentially 2-5 years away from reaching 18. Thereafter he’d likely put financial arrangements in place for them via a trust.

      He’s currently offering a $1.5M lump sump and 30k a month child support, but even if he tripled that amount to $90k a month he’d still only be liable as follows :

      Years 1 & 2 – @ $90k/ month = $2,160,000 (3 children under 18)
      Year 3 – @ $60k/ month = $720,000 (2 children under 18)
      Years 4 & 5 – @ $30k/ month = $720,000 (1 child under 18)

      So he’d only be out of pocket by @ $5.1M ($3.6M above + $1.5M lump sum) over 5 years if he goes down the child support route and they agree to keep the prenup sealed.

      If she manages to set aside the prenup that amount will increase dramatically to take into account her contribution to the home and raising three children over nearly 20 years.

    • Ashley L. says:

      Lawyer here and I agree with Val and Lucy2. She signed a prenup. Its a contract. Its enforceable unless a Court determines otherwise. We don’t know the circumstances of course of how they came to enter into the agreement, but I assume she had competent legal counsel at the time and she abided by the agreement for 20 years. You don’t get to pick and choose what aspects of a contract you want to comply with and which ones you don’t. If the agreement does not already have language that modifies the terms based on the length of the marriage or the number of children and their ages, she could have moved to modify/update the agreement based on the change in their circumstances over the years, but seemingly she did not do that. She can try to negotiate a more favorable settlement based on current circumstances in the divorce, but that’s separate from the terms of the prenup.

      I’m sure that she has reasons for not wanting to leave their marital home and the home she has raised their children in, but couples of much lesser means that them do it all the time when their marriages end and they can no longer afford the home solo and have to sell it and move on.

      • Rapunzel says:

        Ashley- as a lawyer, you should know that a pre-nup only applies to prenuptial assets. While this pre-nup might have certain money allotted for a house, etc., in event of divorce, in community property state like CA, she is still entitled to half his assets gained during their marriage. This pre-nup does not negate that.

        Christine is owed way more than this pre-nup covers, and she will get it. As she should.

      • Lizzie Bathory says:

        No. Community property is a rebuttable presumption under California law. That presumption may be rebutted by the existence of a valid premarital agreement. The California Family Code provides that premarital agreements may contract regarding “rights and obligations of each of the parties in any of the property of either or both of them whenever and wherever acquired or located.”

        Costner may be an asshole, but as long as the statutory requirements were complied with, the premarital agreement should hold up.

      • Eurydice says:

        Perhaps it’s a child custody issue? As I posted above, this is an area where California law supersedes any prenup.

      • Ashley L. says:

        Rapunzel, the article is very clear the house at question is a premarital asset purchased years before they married with premarital assets. And as Lizzie Bathory points out, valid prenups that are upheld trump whatever the laws of the state are, be it community property or equitable distribution. Anything that is deemed to be not covered by the terms of the prenup, again assuming it is upheld, will then be governed by the applicable laws of the state in determining what is a marital asset and how it should be allocated.

      • Rapunzel says:

        “Anything that is deemed to be not covered by the terms of the prenup, again assuming it is upheld, will then be governed by the applicable laws of the state in determining what is a marital asset and how it should be allocated.”

        This is exactly what I said. I never said the prenup doesn’t trump the law. I never said she deserves the house. I said whatever isn’t covered by the prenup is community property. Which is going to be large amount of stuff if this thing is 20 years old. She will get $$$$$ as she should.

    • Jaded says:

      @Val — you appear to be missing a “compassion chip”. The focus should be on their children and making this as drama/trauma-free as possible for them. So you can see he’s acting like the selfish, cruel prick he’s always been. She seems like a very hands-on mom but you can’t expect the kids to live in a trailer park and eat Kraft dinner every day. They have a right to be maintained in a manner similar to what they’ve had to date. Costner is weaponizing his own children and for that Christine has every right to after him like a heat-seeking missile.

      Also, this is giving credence to the rumour that he fathered a child with someone on the Yellowstone set.

    • Ameerah M says:

      So let me get this straight: You think she should move out – with their three MINOR kids for him to stay in a house he barely lived in – which is the reason why they’re divorcing in the first place?? And that makes sense to you? That the rules from a 25 year old pre-nup should apply to her AND their three kids – that didn’t exist when the pre-nup was signed??

    • Mallory says:

      The prenup, drafted by Costner & his lawyers, may likely be unenforceable & she knows it now.
      He is the one who is referencing it to make the public pressure her to move out with her three minor children. She wants the entire document public, he does not.
      This smells like he did a fast one on her when they got married.
      If it’s bs…they’ve got no prenup & she should stay right where she, and their children, reside.
      *Women: if you sign an illegal contract, it’s signed under duress, or willfully misrepresented (and you can prove it), it’s unenforceable.

    • Vi says:

      @val totally agree. I remember when they was dating. She was like Kate middleton. He tried to put her off marriage. Even her family vouched for it. He knew it was a mistake before it begun.she wanted Kevin costner. He even talked about her youth and how she should go live life. I’m on his side with this. He never lied to her.

      She was never treated like MRS COSTNER in the press. They tried to elevate her for like 2 years but she didn’t want to expand. So, she had all the time in the world to plan her divorce. She can have another house. He tried to divorce her and maybe even more than once. She knows the score she just doesn’t want to be forgotten. The house ties her to him always. Even after the kids go to college.

      • The Old Chick says:

        VI are you OK? Dragging middlebum into it is weird given royalty have a flipping paid by the tax payer job. A woman marrying, having 3 kids, maintaining family and home while her husband travels constantly for work, isn’t required to be elevated by anyone. Wow! ‘she can have another house’ and ‘planned her divorce’? You’re either a poor part of his pr team, you’re a paid troll (and just terrible at it) or you hate women. Potentially all three.

      • Meh says:

        @VI Kevin Lostner’s PR firm, is that you?

      • Jaded says:

        @VI — Interesting that you seem to know so many intimately personal details about their relationship and marriage. Methinks you’re a hired bot from Costner’s team. Now go away.

  11. Another Anna says:

    “She enjoyed the benefits of the premarital agreement” What benefits? Getting to be married to Kevin Costner? Ooh what a benefit. Whomst among us wouldn’t trade places with her because she got to be married to Kevin Costner!

    He has a very high opinion of himself.

  12. HeyKay says:

    The fact that Kevin says “charged to MY credit card” is he nuts?
    She is on his account with a card of her own. Married, that is how most married people live.
    Every time he speaks, he looks worse.
    Ego, selfish, money hoarder. He is showing his ass here.
    He was terrible to Cindy, now he is terrible to Christine.
    Pre-nup or not, IMO, this divorce is going to cost him at least $60-$70M upfront, plus child support plus trust funds for the kids, etc. He is worth $250-$300M. He can afford it.
    Why is he even arguing? Ego, that is why.

    Btw, Neil Diamond has been divorced 2x, the settlements were something like $40-$50M each IIRC.
    When asked he said “We were married for decades, we have children, we love(d) each other. It is only right.” Exactly, Neil.

    • Twin Falls says:

      The fact that Kevin says “charged to MY credit card” is he nuts?
      She is on his account with a card of her own. Married, that is how most married people live.

      This and the fact that it sounds like he controlled all the money *he* made since he hasn’t once referred to “our” anything. In his mind, there is no community between them.

      I bet she isn’t surprised by his behavior but it’s still a painful thing to go through. I wish her fortitude and excellent legal representation. I hope the kids have a strong support system too.

  13. Turtledove says:

    I think it is absolutely fine for him to keep all the houses, but only if he gives her enough time and money to buy an appropriate house in the area, and enough to keep their kids in the lifestyle they have become accustomed to and she isn’t doing that with 1.5 mil.

    It can be hard to be wrap one’s head around the financials here if one is not loaded. For a lot of people, a settlement of 1.5 mil would be a dream come true, more than we have ever or hoped to see in our life. (Me included.)

    But they have 3 kids in school/activities/social circles in that ritzy area. She needs to be able to live in that ritzy area for the sake of her kids. That is what is considered fair in a divorce and it doesn’t change just because he is a super loaded movie star.

    His claims of being homeless are disgusting. He owns several homes, including one next door. But even if he didn’t and that was his only house, he is worth millions, he isn’t going to end up on the street. Comparing himself to people who actually are struggling is just so gross.

    • lucy2 says:

      Exactly. He’s going to end up paying a lot of money to keep the kids in the same lifestyle they live now – as he should.

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      All of his behavior and whining in this situation has been both awful and telling but the “homeless” comment really shows how much he sees himself as a victim.

      He is absolutely pathetic.

  14. It Really Is You, Not Me I’m says:

    This is gossip gold. He’s completely out of touch if he thinks that claiming he’ll be homeless is going to garner any sympathy at all. He needs to start listening to his PR team on this.

  15. what's inside says:

    She needs that property as a bargaining chip for freedom and maintaining a lifestyle for herself and the kids. I cannot imagine that she would want to continue living there with him right next door in an adjacent property. Also Kevin needs to get a grip. He is gone for long periods of time and could easily set himself up comfortably elsewhere. Prenups are good for the short-term, but long-term it is up for negotiation.

    • Scout says:

      Disagree. She signed the paper, she should honor her promise.

      That property has NEVER been hers and it was never meant to be hers.

      • Bean says:

        A good divorce attorney will tell you to stay in the house, even with a prenup.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        And that house will remain his since he owned it before the marriage. Quit acting like she’s trying to steal the house from him.

        Currently, they are not divorced so there is no legal reason for her to move. Even if the pre-nup states she has to move within 30 days of filing for divorce there are now 3 minor children to consider so that clause will be deemed unenforceable.

        She doesn’t want that house, she wants a fair settlement and child support payments and trust funds for the children.

        Kevin is being unreasonable.

  16. Scout says:

    I hope she has the data to back her actions up. Because she did make a deal. And 1.2 million is a huge amount of money, realistically speaking. I would gladly raise 3 children with a 1.2 mil house.

    • Eurydice says:

      1.2 million wouldn’t even buy you a condo in Boston – not for 3 kids.

      • Scout says:

        Why does she have to buy in California or Boston? Over 1 Million would be great in the area I live which is Charlotte. And in top school zones. I’d say the further those kids get from the toxic celebrity environment the better off they are.

    • H says:

      @scout, I would gladly take 1.4 million and run as that would buy me a mega mansion where I live. However, in that part of California that will barely get you a two-bedroom shack, maybe a condo? She has three minor children and each need a bedroom, plus hers, unless she wants to sleep on a couch? Houses in that area go from 6 million up. Cosner has a compound and multiple homes on it.

      He’s not homeless. He has like 160-acre ranch in Aspen, Colorado. Boohoo, Kevin. My heart doesn’t bled for him. He should throw $10-15 million at her for a house and I bet you, she’ll take it.

    • Towans says:

      Scout, $1.2 million amounts to a 1 bed box in a sketchy part of LA. Relatively speaking, in California, it’s nothing. The only way $1.2m suddenly becomes a huge amount of money is if you move several states away.

    • Jaded says:

      @Scout – $1.2 million is chump change. And to expect her to move to some backwater is unconscionable. Does this mean he’d have the kids most of the time? Is he trying to deprive her of her children? His filming schedule is insane and he’s rarely at home. Mr. Jaded and I have close to $1 million in investments, yet we rent our condo, drive a 12 year old Mazda and live frugally. It’s because we can’t afford to buy in our city housing prices are so high. He has a moral responsibility to maintain HIS family in a similar lifestyle to what they’ve had, which he can certainly afford.

  17. I think most of Costner’s cash is tied up in real estate. This guy is notoriously cheap. When they got engaged, Joan Rivers, on the red carpet said “let me see the ring”, then, she scoffed at Kevin and said “that’s it”! She shamed him into buying her a larger ring.

  18. Athena says:

    If Kevin loves that house so much he can keep it, but since I’m sure he’s a loving father who prioritizes his children needs he’ll buy them decent size house nearby to live in.

    What’s his story? Did he have a traumatic childhood? Suffered homelessness?

  19. Isabella says:

    Bizarre to me, when she’s raising their 3 kids. Where the hell are they supposed to live? With him? Wow. What a jerk. He will for sure be paying child support. That’s not going away.

  20. BlueNailsBetty says:

    The juxtaposition between this story and the Gabrielle/Dwayne splitting bills story is almost surreal.

    I’ve read some (stupid, ignorant) takes (not here!) about Gabrielle’s insistence on having a financial plan that works for both of them that makes my heart ache. Gabrielle knows money and love are not the same thing. She also called Dwayne on “his” ownership of a home where their marriage and child rearing was taking place. He grew up having toxic masculinity shoved into his brain and she showed him where he was wrong, what that meant to her and their children, and she gave him information on how to fix the problem.

    Gabrielle knew her worth and she made sure Dwayne knew her worth.

    Christine is about to learn a valuable lesson: never trust anyone to honor your financial worth if you don’t honor it yourself.

    What a lot of the people who are saying “adhere to the pre-nup!” are missing is Christine most likely became a housewife and mother who’s only salary was a small (for his wealth) token, if at all.

    It’s easy to say she was a signer on his credit card or they had an account with household expenses. However, if she was not receiving compensation for her time and efforts for raising his children and managing the home she was not only severely under valued, she missed the earnings value of 1. funding her Social Security and 2. funding her investment portfolio.

    If she adhere’s to the pre-nup she is so screwed. She’s not famous, she’s been out of the job market for years, and she’ll need to raise their children in a town where Kevin has enormous power (do you think Kevin will allow her to move to another town/area?). He’s already showing he’s going to follow the Clint Eastwood Protocol. Now Kevin is going to try to smear her name and financially abuse her as punishment for daring to end the marriage.

    He began (formally) abusing her financially when he insisted on that ridiculous pre-nup. She was probably financially naive and young and in love and in her heart it didn’t matter because they were ❤️4ever and that man stood there, in cold blood, and watched her sign her future away. He watched as she signed herself into a modern version of marital indentured servitude.

    He already knew what he would do if she filed for divorce because he was still bitter his previous ex got a boatload of money and there was nothing he could do but he could punish the new wife before they even got married. There was no way a woman was ever going to “screw him over” again. He doesn’t value any woman or the work they do raising “his” children and managing “his” homes/non-work life. The pre-nup Christine signed was glaring proof of that. She may not have understood any of that back then but her divorce attorney sure as hell understands it now.

    So yeah, Kevin is yet another narcissist and he needs to pay a fair amount of a settlement to Christine.

    And we should all applaud Gabrielle Union for knowing her worth and helping spread the word about marital finances.

    • theotherviv says:

      I’m with you on that. But I wonder where the $40 million figure comes from for Gabrielle when there are plenty of actresses like Taraji, Nia Long, etc are nowhere NEAR that figure?
      Maybe Halle, but Halle has had a longer career and an Academy Award. I think Gbrielle has way less but still enough muulah to tell Wade to stuff it with the bragging. Good on her. Christine should not be left with less than 10% of KC’s net worth after 20 yrs.
      I showed both these articles to my man saying “Sometimes men just make me nauseous” and he laughed hysterically and gave me half of his donut IMMEDIATELY.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        In addition to a long career in which she did her best to get paid as much as possible, I’m sure Gabrielle invested her money wisely and compound interest has substantially raised her financial worth.

        Unfortunately, many entertainers accept crap paychecks because they fall for the “but you’ll get exposure for future projects” f*ckery AND they know nothing about how to invest their money. They end up not investing (or doing it poorly) or they trust someone else to do it for them and that person does a bad job of it (or flat out steals some of it).

        So I can believe GU has that kind of money. As for the other people you mentioned…it depends on how knowledgable they are about money. I’d bet Halle is very knowledgable. Taraji and Nia? I don’t know much about their money mindset. I hope they have it nailed down and earning them seriously dividends every day.

        Lastly, on a personal note…love that your man immediately gave you 50% of his donut! He totally gets it. 😁

    • ME says:

      You make valid points. But to be honest, did she need to give up her career when she married him? Was that part of the pre-nup? They are rich and could afford nannies. She didn’t need to leave the job market the entire 20 years they were together. Women need to learn to always have a nest egg of their own. Men change, they cheat, they do bad things. Don’t rely on men for your financial support. Also, don’t sign a pre-nup unless you truly believe you can make it on your own without his money.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:

        I don’t know why she did not work on a career, however, I can think of a reason why this happened.

        If Kevin is the narcissist I think he is it is entirely possible he didn’t want her to have a big career.

        1. He wants to be the famous one in the couple. He wants the attention focused on him.

        2. He wanted to control her and women with their own money are harder to control.

        3. He wanted her to raise the children (even if there was a nanny to help out). His image is based on the perception he’s a “cowboy” and “traditional”. He might expect the woman to do the “women’s work”.

        4. Maybe she doesn’t have a lot of education or experience in the business world and kind of fell into the SAHM role.

        These are just off the top of my head. We don’t know what discussions they had before the pre-nup was signed/they got married. But considering she wasn’t out there hustling up a career instead of doing the SAHM role, I’d bet there was (at best) miscommunication or (worse) misinformation about finances.

      • ME says:

        Yeah but knowing she lived in a home that was only in HIS name should have been a huge red flag. How naive was she? His wife is 49 years old. She was 29 when she married him. Old enough to know how a pre-nup works. She was almost 30. You are right, we don’t know all the details. But we do know there is a pre-nup. Kevin wanted to protect his assets he earned before they were married. I can understand that. Now if the pre-nup says she gets nothing even after being married to him for 20 years, that’s another thing and she should have thought long and hard before signing that, especially if she wasn’t planning on working. She will probably get spousal and child support, which should be a hefty amount considering how much this dude is worth. I’m not sure how much he made in the past 20 years but it’s still probably in the millions.

      • BlueNailsBetty says:


        Unfortunately, I know a lot of people 40 yo to 80 yo who don’t know anything about the legal/financial aspects of marriage.

        It’s not taught in high school and that leaves people shockingly vulnerable.

        In this particular case, Christine may simply have never had experience with any of this. Maybe she just went along with all of it because she made the mistake of thinking it would be like billions of marriages throughout time. Two people get married, blend their lives and bank accounts, and live together just fine.

        I’m 55 yo and I didn’t know a lot of this back when I was 30-40.

        As far as whether or not she read the pre-nup before signing…who knows. Most of the people I know don’t read paperwork before signing. I do and I preach the gospel on it but most people feel a little intimidated by contracts and just want the immediate benefit the contract gives them.

  21. Heat says:

    I’m confused. If KC is trying to get her evicted from the home, does that also mean that he’s trying to evict his own children from the place they’ve lived their entire lives?
    It’s disgusting enough that he wants her out, but their kids?!?!
    I guess it only matters that Mr. Kevin Costner is going to be homeless. Douche-canoe.

  22. Reign says:

    Raising their three kids and this is how he treats her.

    Come on, Kevin. You’re no angel and definitely not homeless. Christine, hit’em up style while you are at it!

  23. HeyKay says:

    What is this I am hearing that Kevin gave her $100K on their wedding day and another $100K on their one year anniversary?

    Rich people are weird to me.
    I do not understand that, it sounds like a hooker pay out.
    Why not just gift her a checking account with $500K for her personal use (walking around money at his level) and then have the all the household bills on a separate account?
    His biz accounts, the house and decorating accounts, travels, kids education, medical, etc. all on his accounts. He makes Millions a year. He bank rolled her handbag biz. She spent their years together being the primary caretaker of their kids, he can easily afford to be generous.
    Why do wealthy men think this way? 20 years of love, support, care and raising 3 kids = that was her work. He wanted a traditional wife, she wants her freedom and financial security now.

    Settle up quietly and quickly Kevin. He will spend millions in lawyers fees trying to be a cheapskate and in his head “better I win and pay the lawyers vs. give her MY money.”
    She is staying in that house, rightfully until the divorce settlement is done.
    That pre-nup should have been updated every 5 years, IMO.
    Can we start a pool to guess her settlement?
    I say $60M to her, + child support + all costs of kids, including education, hobbies, health insurance + trust funds for each kid $10M.

    Btw, how sad is it, that he wants her out of that $145M house, and then what is going to do at 68 y/o walk around inside an empty house by himself? Sad, sad, sad old stubborn man.

  24. Oh_Dear says:

    I can understand why some of you are saying that she should follow the prenup, as it is a legal agreement she entered into.

    My issue is this – Costner has willingly used his financial power to maintain control over his wife. By holding her to an agreement she made 20 years ago, before kids and with less life experience and resources than he had, he has continued to increase his access to freedom and minimize hers. He could have initiated an update that was more equitable to her and recognized the oppressive nature in the disparity in access to resources of their original agreement.

    He has also used their kids to maintain power over his wife. She cannot keep those kids in the neighbourhood with their school, friends, and activities on the finances available to her. The fact that he can and is controlling financial access, is another form of financial abuse. It is also emotional abuse. She has to consider her access to their kids, and what is in their best interest so taking 1.3 million dollars and finding a house means disrupting their lives in a huge way. And she has a right to file for divorce, so staying isn’t the solution. He may also not allow her to move the kids to another jurisdiction so she is stuck. I think this is the reason she isn’t leaving the house – she has few options because she is under his control financially, and legally as it relates to the kids.

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      “By holding her to an agreement she made 20 years ago, before kids and with less life experience and resources than he had”

      This, right here, is the number one reason so many of these men hit on women substantially younger than them: those women are easier to control and manipulate and then throw away when the man gets tired of them.

    • Jaded says:

      Exactly. And we still don’t know why she filed. It’s quite possible she caught him having an affair (i.e. rumours of him fathering a child on the Yellowstone set), he may have become abusive to her and there was a “culminating incident” (i.e. he got Brad Pitt-level violent with her), but whatever happened it generated an instantaneous divorce action, not just separating for a cool-off period.

  25. HeyKay says:

    A shout out of respect for #1 wife Cindy and the kids he has with her.
    They are very wisely staying out of the public eye.
    I wonder if Cindy is just shaking her head? Kevin will not change.

  26. ME says:

    Ok but she signed a pre-nup before they got married stating if they ever get divorced she has 30 days to leave the home he owns. Why did she agree to this? What good is a pre-nup if the courts won’t abide by it? He said he would pay for her moving costs and he gave her $1.5 dollars even though the pre-nup doesn’t state he has to. She should have negotiated a better pre-nup. I’m not saying this dude is an angel or anything, but she knew what she was getting into when she signed that sh*t.

    • D says:

      I signed a prenup, also 20 years ago. You absolutely don’t think about 20 years down the line when you are as young as she was and in love. Yes, your lawyer, if he/she are any good, should explain to you that if you have kids and stay home you will lose income and should be compensated for that, but she may not have wanted to hear it and/or Costner rushed the prenup…many people asking for one will slide it to you right before the wedding with very little time to negotiate. I’m not sure that happened in this situation but it’s very common. Everyone saying she signed a document 20 years before and needs to follow it to the letter has clearly never been married for that long and have minor children that need to be taken care of. It’s not as easy as she should just rent someplace near by. Carpinteria is small and remote and very expensive. I’m assuming he doesn’t want her taking the kids far away, but is he going to have them at the house and take care of them? It’s so much more complicated then you are all making it out to be.

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      Because she was young and ignorant. Because he lovebombed her into believing he would never hurt her. Because she had hearts and flowers in her eyes and could barely make out the signature line much less the details. Because she thought they would be together forever and this was just a formality because he had been “burned” before and she want him to know he could trust her.

      I could go on but instead I’m going to ask a question: If Kevin *genuinely* loved her why did he ask (pressure? demand?) her to sign such a crap contract when he clearly knew how detrimental it would be for her and their future children?

      As far as I can see, his asking (pressuring? demanding?) her to agree to that contract was a clear sign of financial abuse.

      He knew, before she signed on the dotted line, he was going to try to screw her over if she ever had the audacity to want out of the marriage. He wanted the Future 2nd Ex Wife to suffer in a way he wasn’t able to force on 1st Ex Wife.

      • ME says:

        Hey no one here is saying he’s some sort of saint. Also, she was almost 30 years old when she married him, not too young to know what she was signing. She got screwed over with that pre-nup, but hey she was willing to sign it and agree to the conditions as a fully functioning ADULT. What she ever saw in him is beyond me. From what I can tell, he’s a real a$$ on all accounts. Maybe she liked the cushy lifestyle he could provide her and thought there was nothing he could do to ever make her want to leave. I guess things change. Women should take note…always have your own money. Don’t allow a man to control you like this. I know in some situations it’s difficult to do that though.

  27. Sparky says:

    This pre-nup may address this issue but if not… Costner’s salary earned during the marriage is community property. Therefore, if he paid a mortgage using a portion of those funds that amount became community property.

    • Mar says:

      He probably paid cash for it ( but who knows rich people are weird) and that was a year before he married Christine.

  28. BlueNailsBetty says:

    I agree with HeyKay’a prediction of the final settlement.

    I will also add a prediction: KC goes to the dark side and ends up a full blown Republican.

    He worships money and power.

    He’s abusive to the women in his life.

    He’s publicly supported Liz Freaking Cheney because she did one (1) thing right (vs all the other heinous crap she has voted for).

    The blowback from this divorce is going to have him whining about being “cancelled” even though his career will not be affected.

    The bulk of his career is based on him being “western” (ie, white cowboy) and “traditional” (ie. wanting to live in a time when women had no rights).

    He is happily barreling down the path to the Cliff of Magats.

  29. Kkat says:

    I got divorced in California when we had a minor child.
    If you leave the primary residence and you don’t take the kid with you ( because you can’t afford to because you weren’t allowed to work)
    You greatly risk losing custody.

    If you take the kid with you, you are screwing the kid out of being able to live how the kid is accustomed to.
    i.e. his access to his school, friends, belongings and food he is used to.

    I was not allowed to move out of the county with my child and I couldn’t afford living in it, had I left I couldn’t have taken my child who I was the primary 24/7 caretaker to.

    My lawyer told me not to go anywhere, and then the judge ordered I could stay while custody and child support was settled.
    Which in California usually takes 2-4 years.

    So people saying she should leave the home are more than just naive
    And the “lawyers” in the comments here obviously are not from California, but more likely are not divorce/family law attorneys or attorneys at all :p

    What she is doing is divorce/custody 101 in California 😜

    • Ashley L. says:

      As one of the “lawyers” you refer to, I am very much a real lawyer (with the student loan debt to prove it), I have practiced family law, and I also understand how contracts, which ultimately a prenup is, work. Although I do not practice in CA.

      If prenups just went out the window because the marriage lasted a long time or there are now children involved, what would be the point of them?

      If she challenges the prenup and wins and its invalidated, that’s one thing. But if not and the Court upholds the prenup, she’s bound by it unless she negotiates otherwise. Anything not deemed covered by the terms of the prenup, assuming the prenup is upheld, will be subject to regular community property laws governing the distribution of marital assets.

      It doesn’t seem that there is a custody issue, I have not seen that KC is seeking custody. Without knowing the exact terms of the prenup we cannot say that it wasn’t contemplated they would have children when the move out of the home clause was included.

  30. BlueNailsBetty says:

    Related side note:

    Thank you to everyone here who has asked questions and to everyone who has given information/shared personal experiences.

    Open and honest community conversations like this are how we learn and protect ourselves and our loved ones.

  31. Sass says:

    I grew up watching Kevin Costner movies – my parents loved him – and until pretty recently I knew almost nothing about him and I liked him, too. Now with these shenanigans? Wow. Ugh.

    Apparently there was a huuuuuge rumor back in the day that Cal Ripken caught Costner in bed with his wife. There’s an entire podcast about it. Just wild.

  32. HeyKay says:

    Sass, Atta girl! That’s some pretty good celeb gossip right there. 😁
    I think I remember that and thinking WTH? Ripken is a Hall of Famer, Kevin must really be something, Damn!
    Kevin was for most of the 90’s a top draw actor/director/well known cheater-skirt chaser.
    He cheated on #1 wife constantly.
    And after their divorce he was openly a dog!
    Google who he dated, it’s a list of some of the most beautiful, talented female celebs of the day. (Courtney Cox at the height of her career and beauty, and this was a woman who had been involved with Michael Keaton in his Batman days)
    And he carried on with tons of everyday females, the talk was he owned a bar just so he could hang out there and hit on all the ladies, he formed a band for the same reason, he was openly playing the field, with groupies, waitresses, etc.
    Oh yeah, back in the day, Kevin was catnip to a lot of women. LOL

    Physically, except for the hair, he is still a good looking man for 68.
    His behavior and treatment of the wives tho, zeros out the attraction.

    Nobody has mentioned his initial statement lately “He was blindsided. He would still take her back.” She wants to be done with you Kevin! You do not have an option, she has made her choice. Any thoughts she might have entertained of reconciling are Shot To Hell by his behavior “She has 30 days to leave.”
    Those 3 homes are agreed in the pre-nup that he owned them before they married.
    It is NOTHING to him to show reasonable decency, simply having she and the kids live there until all the divorce issues are settled. In the old days lots of Kevins cowboy fans would have expected a cowboy (him) to act with decency and honor the Mother of his children “Act like a Man!, Don’t be cruel to their Mother!”

    I admit to being Team Christine and kids. Kevin looks small, petty, angry, and very selfish in this.
    I do not think I will watch his new Horizon show. I do not support a$$holes IRL.

    Keep the gossip coming! 👍

  33. j.ferber says:

    I’m rooting for Christine and the three kids and hope she sinks Kevin like a lead balloon. You go, girl.

  34. Gelya says:

    I said yesterday he mismanages money. She knows it. I am sorry he is attached to this house but Mr. Homeless over here needs to get a lawyer who gives him the hard truth. That prenup is twenty years old and now there are kids involved. No judge in their right mind is going to uphold that prenup as it stands. They will amend it. Who is Mr. Homeless lawyer? Rudy Guiliani?
    He keeps saying my house. That is his kids home. That is a big difference. His wording shows it is just a piece of real estate to him. I understand it is a pricey piece of real estate he doesn’t want to lose. He lost it the day she made it into a home. I know a judge won’t take that into account. He will take into account it is the children’s home
    I think Mr. Homeless is not worried about the home. I think he has used it as collateral for that new movie he is making. If the movie bombs well he is SOL isn’t he? He bleeds money. He is not worried about the home. I think he is worried it is going to come out that he is in financial trouble.
    I think he is so handsome. I always will. I would have dumped him after Waterworld and the financial hit he took. He bleeds money and is tight fisted. That is just a finance nightmare.