Very, very inneresting!
Pretty much everyone has an opinion on Kim Kardashian's 72-day marriage to Kris Humphries, and the media scrutiny now surrounding their divorce, including lawyer Raoul Felder, otherwise known as the Duke of Divorce, who has represented such high-profile clients as Martin Scorsese, David Gest, and Rudy Giuliani!
Check out some of his insight (below):
On why she filed for divorce and not an annulment:
An annulment is based on fraud… it requires corroboration, witnesses to back it up. The average person with a 60-day marriage would be talking with their lawyer about an annulment. But there is a lot of exposure involved in it and I just don't think they want that. I think in this case it would hurt them; it's easier to get divorced.
What will happen to her engagement ring:
An engagement ring is a gift of contemplation, a contemplation of marriage. If the marriage takes place it a completed gift. If it doesn't take place, the prospective husband has an argument to get the ring back. But this marriage took place. I think there is also a question of who bought the ring? She's not wearing it now, I saw in a photograph. For all we know maybe this whole thing was for show.
If sponsors and vendors from the wedding can rightfully sue:
Presumably, when [Kim and Kris] got married they made a commitment that it was going to be forever. Well forever was two months. If the [sponsors] came to me I would investigate it. I would think they have a shot at a lawsuit. I would find out what their real intentions were, whether he intended to be married forever, when she made the airplane reservations to go to Australia, all kinds of questions like that. I’m sure that most of the people [who gave] products, anyone from jewelers to wedding gowns, to whatever, [thought it would be] very good exposure. Now it’s part of a joke, a national joke.
If it was $50 you write it off–I don't mean grandma giving a soup terrine. They gave expensive gifts. I think some of the stuff they received was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. These are people that are giving for commercial reasons, I think. [I would need to] get a deposition to figure out what the true story is.
If Kim can successfully ban Kris from requesting spousal support:
Spousal support was probably worked out in the prenuptial agreement. I would be shocked if it wasn't…It's not his fault he's unemployed. It's because of the strike that he's unemployed. If he's any kind of earner he may not get spousal support, because when he's working he's really making money and self supporting. The 800-pound gorilla in the room is that they were only married two months for all intents and purposes. What kind of spousal support can you get for two months' marriage? It's a long date, that's all it is. A 2-month date.
How the profits of the wedding will be divided:
That could be shared. If that's not covered in the prenuptial agreement, that's joint money they made. That would probably be something that would be divided. Or returned. Most people who have class return a lot of stuff.
Well, unfortunately, we already know that the profits of the wedding pretty much went to Kim, as through their prenuptial agreement, so there you go!
But we think that pretty much only further gives credit to his assertion the entire debacle is a "joke, a national joke!"
Congratulations, gurl! Is this the kind of press you were looking for?
[Image via WENN.]
Tags: divorce, insight, kim kardashian, kris humphries, lawyer, marriage, raoul felder, wedding