Overview of the Kevin Costner Divorce

The Kevin Costner Divorce marked the dissolution of the marriage between actor Kevin Costner and restaurateur Cindy Silva; the Kevin Costner Divorce was finalized in 1994, which ended the 16-yearlong marriage. Although the case of the Kevin Costner Divorce, which was considered by various media outlets as a celebrity, the impact of the dissolution of a union is thought to be universal; amongst the events and undertakings within a divorce proceeding, a divorce has the potential to elicit heightened emotions, such as sadness and loss. Within the reports surrounding the Kevin Costner divorce, Cindy Silva was cited for her attempts to reconcile the marriage at all costs, even despite the alleged extramarital affairs undertaken by her husband.

The Parties Involved in the Kevin Costner Divorce

Kevin Costner has enjoyed an illustrious and widely-acclaimed acting career within which he has acted in some of the most famed and beloved films in history, including Dances with Wolves, JFK, Field of Dreams, The Untouchables, and The Bodyguard; in addition to the vast critical acclaim bestowed on Kevin Costner for these roles, he amassed a large fortune over the course of his career. While both Kevin Costner and Cindy Silva were students at the University of California at Fullerton, the couple embarked on a romantic relationship resulting in their marriage in 1978; the couple share 3 children.

The Plea of ‘No Contest’ within the Kevin Costner Divorce

An uncontested divorce is one in which both parties have reached a mutual agreement with regard to the reasons behind filing for divorce, as well as the placement of fault in conjunction to the breakdown of the marriage. In the case of the Kevin Costner Divorce, both Kevin Costner and Cindy Silva opted to file for a divorce uncontested – or unchallenged – in nature, which retained the classification of the reason for the Kevin Costner Divorce as a result, a bulk of celebrity couples undertaking divorce proceedings opt to either settle outside of court or file for divorce in an uncontested fashion in order to avoid potential media coverage and publicity:

In contrast the presumed intentions of both Kevin Costner and Cindy Silva with regard to the unchallenged file for divorce, allegation begun to fly with regard to the presumed infidelity undertaken by Kevin Costner throughout the couple marriage; however, these allegations were never substantiated –  the couple later cited irreconcilable differences with regard to the Kevin Costner divorce settlement

The Terms of the Kevin Costner Divorce Settlement

A divorce settlement will typically include 3 primary facets with regard to the terms and conditions set forth by the presiding court official who was responsible for determining spousal support – in the form of alimony, child custody – and subsequent child support payments, and the division of assets. The State of California implements a statute that recognizes joint assets accrued by a couple subsequent to marriage with regard to their classification as ‘community property’; community property was split upon the finalization of the Kevin Costner Divorce – supplemental agreements with regard to the additional furnishing of assets or monies are typically kept private. However, subsequent to the ruling of the presiding judge, the following judicial review was set forth with regard to the terms of the Kevin Costner Divorce settlement:

Despite reports of the efforts put forth by Cindy Silva to save their marriage, Kevin Costner furnished a payment of $80 million with regard to the Kevin Costner divorce settlement; the amount of this payment is considered to be amongst the largest in the history of celebrity divorces occurring within the United States

Kid Cudi Arrested

On June 11th, 2010, Rapper and member of the Hip-Hip community Kid Cudi – whose real name is Scott Mescudi – was arrested in New York City within the area known as ‘Chelsea’. Despite Kid Cudi arrested, he remains one of Rapper Kanye West’s prodigies in addition to undertaking vast musical collaborations and a budding acting career. Yet, upon the arrival of law enforcement agents following the report of criminal activity, Kid Cudi was reported to have torn an apartment door from its hinges and broken into that same apartment using physical force – after Kid Cudi had gained access to the apartment of the unidentified female victim later named as Kid Cudi’s girlfriend, he was reported to have forcefully obtained and destroyed her cellphone:

If these events leading to Kid Cudi arrested were not enough, law enforcement found a glass bottle with what they had believe to be an illegal substance; upon testing, the substance was reported to be liquid cocaine

However, the events surrounding Kid Cudi arrested did not mention whether the artist was intoxicated at that time

Law enforcement agents had Kid Cudi arrested, despite the fact that he had been scheduled to perform at the ‘Bonnaroo Festival’, which is considered to be one of the nation’s largest musical festival held annually in Tennessee; however, despite Kid Cudi arrested, he managed to attend the festival and perform

What Was Kid Cudi Arrested For?

Upon Kid Cudi arrested, the applicable charges filed included criminal mischief and the possession of an illegal substance. However, due to the fact that both parties – Kid Cudi and his girlfriend – allegedly reported the incident to be the result of a domestic dispute, the charges were dropped conditionally; while the criminal mischief charges would be dismissed from Kid Cudi arrested, Kid Cudi would be required to plead guilty to possession charges regarding the glass of liquid cocaine:

What is Liquid Cocaine?

Cocaine – even in its liquid form – is considered to be one of the most highly-addictive narcotics currently in circulation, which has been the cause of millions of deaths since its introduction to society. Cocaine can impair individuals’ behavior and demeanor, which typically results in criminal activity and violence. While the possession of Cocaine is considered to be a criminal felony; depending upon the amount discovered on an individual’s person – in addition to their individual criminal record – will determine the punishment; due to the fact that Kid Cudi was without any prior convictions, he was placed on probation.

Results of Kid Cudi Arrested

Subsequent to Kid Cudi’s arrest, he was given mandatory community service, as well as a required meeting with a drug counselor; the events leading to Kid Cudi arrested also will place Kid Cudi on probation, requiring that he adhere to all legal statutes and lawful behavior. If you need legal advice and assistance, contact West Virginia lawyers.

The Participants in the Kim Kardashian Video

In 2005, Kim Kardashian and her former boyfriend Willie Norwood – oftentimes referred to by his nickname ‘Ray-J’ – filmed themselves engaging in sexual activity while on vacation. Kim Kardashian, who is now 26 years old, is the daughter of Robert Kardashian – Robert Kardashian was one of the primary members of the defense team for the O.J. Simpson murder trial assisting in the acquittal of Simpson. ‘Ray-J’ is the brother of famous singer Brandy. While the credentials of both participants may not appear to render the notoriety that has been associated with the Kim Kardashian Sextape, the release of the video was one of the most talked-about within modernity.

Kim Kardashian Admitted to Filming the Sex Tape Willingly

Despite the fact that the Kim Kardashian Video portrays images and activity considered to be both private and personal, the former couple admitted to participating in the Kim Kardashian Sextape without the intention of it being released; however, subsequent to the Kim Kardashian Video being ‘leaked’ – a colloquialism used to define the unauthorized availability of a particular piece of media – its release was considered to be a highly-controversial topic.

The Controversy Surrounding the Kim Kardashian Sextape

Vivid Video, which is considered to be amongst the most prominent names in the adult film industry, maintained that they had been given access to the Kim Kardashian Video in both a legal and lawful manner; however, neither Kim Kardashian nor Ray-J have taken responsibility for the release of the video, which was filmed with the intent to remain private – as a result, Kim Kardashian undertook an injunction against the Vivid Video company in order to curtail the release of the Kim Kardashian Sextape.

The Legal Implications of the Kim Kardashian Video

Due to the fact that the details of the release of the Kim Kardashian Sextape have not been disclosed, the lawsuit brought forth by Kim Kardashian included the following:

Kim Kardashian mentioned that Vivid Video was undertaking methods of exploitation and manipulation of the assumed right to release the Kim Kardashian Video, which resulted in the offer of payment for the Kim Kardashian Video in lieu of the refusal to release it

Kim Kardashian’s legal team made mention that the release of the Kim Kardashian video would result in the slandering or unjust conveying of libelous sentiment with the expressed intention of causing harm with regard to Kim Kardashian’s persona; her reality television show ‘Keeping Up with the Kardashians’ was amongst one of the most popular on television

Finally, the release of the Kim Kardashian Video would result in the violation of her privacy; while Ray-J was never named as a codefendant, Kardashian’s legal team explained that the video was in direct violation of Kardashian’s right to privacy

The Conclusion of the Kardashian Video Scandal

Although the specifics of the lawsuit did not receive a great deal of media coverage with regard to the settlement, the Kim Kardashian Sextape was never formally released by Vivid Video; however, it did undergo an unauthorized private release over the Internet – the settlement disallows for any website to willingly host or offer the video.

A Summary of the Events Leading Up to the Kirstie Alley Divorce

In 1997, and Kirstie Alley and Parker Stevenson filed for divorce; as a result of their celebrity status, the couple refrained from releasing the possible catalysts for the undertaking of the divorce process within the State of California – however, media sources had reported that irretrievable differences with regard to each member of the couple’s career path had manifested in a contrasting fashion:

Kirstie Alley and Bob Alley wed in 1970 and divorced almost 7 years later; her marriage to Parker Stevenson was Kirstie Alley’s second marriage, which took place in 1983 – almost 14 years prior to the Kirstie Alley

Both Kirstie Alley and Parker Stevenson are acclaimed actors, who have starred in a variety of noteworthy roles, such as ‘Look Who’s Talking’ and ‘A Separate Piece’

The couple produced 2 children from their marriage, William and Lillie; both children were adopted by the couple in a joint fashion

The Kirstie Alley Divorce in the State of California

Reports stated that Kirstie Alley wished to divorce in Maine, while Setvenson wished to divorce in California; ultimately, the Kirstie Alley divorce took place in California. The divorce laws applicable to the State of California undertake the following stipulations with regard to filing for divorce. In the case of the Kirstie Alley Divorce, the probability of the enactment of a prenuptial agreement wass quite high; as per a large part of celebrity marriages taking place subsequent to one or both of the couples reaching a certain point of celebrity – these types of agreements are commonly undertaken. However, regardless of any or all expressed agreements existing in tandem with the divorce proceedings taking place within the Kirstie Alley Divorce, the couple will be required to adhere to the following parameters with regard to the dissolution of marriage:

The Determination of Fault

Reports released in news sources depicted the Kirstie Alley Divorce as occurring in an amicable and agreeable fashion; reports showed both Kirstie Alley and Parker Stevenson to have remained within good standing with each other. Yet, the parameters of the determination of ‘fault’ in the State of California require the following with regard to the determination of fault:

One or both of the parties must be deemed as mentally incompetent

Irreconcilable difference leading to the irretrievable dissolution of the union; in this case, the divergence of career paths was determined to serve as the catalyst for the Kirstie Alley divorce

The Prenuptial Agreement in the Kirstie Alley Divorce

No prenuptial agreement was formulated by the couple in order to serve as a preemptive, preventative measure with regard to the prospect of the dissolution of the marriage taking place; with regard to the divorce laws enacted within the State of California, a ‘no-fault’ divorce taking place will result in the even split of ‘community property’ – this is defined as any assets that were attained subsequent to the marriage. However, in the case of the Kirstie Alley Divorce, in addition to a variety of celebrities, the receipt of any salary subsequent to marriage will result in its determination as community – or shared – property:

As per the Kirstie Alley divorce settlement, Kirstie Alley kept the couple’s home in Encino, California; she sold her home in 2010 – over 10 years following the Kirstie Alley divorce settlement

Custody and Children in the Kirstie Alley Divorce

In a handwritten note located in tandem with the Kirstie Alley divorce settlement papers, Alley explains that she was requesting the right to bring her children to the set of ‘Deconstructing Harry’, which was a movie in which Kirstie Alley was slated to act.

A Summary of the Andre Agassi Divorce

The Andre Agassi Divorce was finalized in April of 1999, ending the nearly 2-year marriage between Andre Agassi and Brooke Shields – the couple was wed in April of 1997. Speculation surrounding the Andre Agassi Divorce suggests that the events leading up to the Andre Agassi Divorce included <; for those unfamiliar with the Andre Agassi Divorce, the celebrity status of Andre Agassi and Brooke Shields thrust the dissolution of the couple’s marriage into media headlines making it a highly-publicized event in the time that the Andre Agassi Divorce had taken place:

Andre Agassi, at the time of the Andre Agassi Divorce, was considered to be amongst the most electrifying and talented Tennis Players in the world; he had been experiencing a multitude of internationally acclaimed victories in the Olympic Games in the sport of Tennis

Brooke Shields had established herself as an acclaimed actor at a young age, starring in her first film ‘The Blue Lagoon’, which thrust her into the limelight; in addition, Brooke Shield had been modeling on a consistent basis

The Determination of Contest within the Andre Agassi Divorce

In many cases, the celebrity status enjoyed by both Andre Agassi and Brooke Shields would be viewed as a gift and a privilege; however, in the case of the Andre Agassi Divorce, the media coverage latent within the Andre Agassi Divorce proceedings thrust the legal undertakings into the spotlight – a dynamic that was considered to threaten the privacy of the couple facing dissolution. The couple expressed that they had grown apart and no longer could retain a connection; they added that the divorce took place mutually and amicably:

In the event that a couple mutually decides to file for divorce in an uncontested fashion, which means that the couple has both agreed to the terms of the divorce settlement, as well as to the reasoning for the ultimate dissolution of the marriage, the specific details of the divorce settlement are not released to the public record

In an attempt to maintain privacy with regard to not only the monetary terms and conditions of the Andre Agassi Divorce settlement, but also with regard to the alleged reasons for the Andre Agassi Divorce taking place, the respective legal teams belonging to Andre Agassi and Brooke Shields determined that the Andre Agassi Divorce would be filed as uncontested in nature

The Terms and Conditions of the Andre Agassi Divorce

Although the filing of an uncontested divorce was ideal with regard to the privacy of the celebrity couple, both Andre Agassi and Brooke Shields were required to adhere to both preexisting terms and conditions, as well as adhere to any subsequent petitions filed, which included the award of spousal support through alimony, as well as the division of collective assets:

The Division of Assets in the Andre Agassi Divorce

The division of ‘community property’ is defined as any assets that were attained subsequent to the marriage of Andre Agassi and Brooke Shields. However, in certain cases, additional agreements will have been set forth in supplementary agreements with regard to assets and monies. With regard to the Andre Agassi Divorce, the following division of assets is reported to have taken place:

The terms of the prenuptial agreement were kept confidential, but details regarding the division of assets provided information suggesting that couple would split what was estimated to be upwards of $130 million in communal assets, as well as homes in Los Angeles and Las Vegas

The Background of the Fergie Scandal

Overview of the Chris Pontius Divorce

The Chris Pontius Divorce marked the dissolution of the marriage between actor Chris Pontius and his wife of almost 7 years, Claire Nolan; the Chris Pontius Divorce was filed in March of 2011 – Chris Pontius and Claire Nolan were married on October 29th, 2004. The reasoning for the breakdown of a marriage – regardless of the degree of celebrity status – will typically provide a legal framework for the terms and conditions latent within a divorce settlement:

Although few details are known about the impending Chris Pontius divorce settlement, the filing set forth has cited the dissolution of the marriage to result from irreconcilable differences

The Parties Involved in the Chris Pontius Divorce

Chris Pontius is perhaps most widely-known for his role in the Jackass movies, where he and his fellow cast mates engage in wild stunts that are both filmed and orchestrated by the cast members; his wife, Claire Nolan, is not reported as being employed within show business – the couple currently shares no children.

Legal Venue of the Chris Pontius Divorce Hearing

The Chris Pontius Divorce was filed before in the Los Angeles County Court, which is located in the City of Los Angeles in the State of California; Claire Nolan is reported as having filed for the divorce.

The Plea within the Chris Pontius Divorce Settlement

A divorce settlement will typically include 3 primary facets with regard to the terms and conditions set forth by the presiding court official who was responsible for determining spousal support – in the form of alimony, child custody – and subsequent child support payments, and the division of assets. Due to the fact that the Chris Pontius divorce has been filed recently, the associated pleas – with regard to the fault of the dissolution of marriage – have yet to be named; the following are some potential outcomes upon the determination of the plea:

An Uncontested Plea within the Chris Pontius Divorce

An uncontested divorce is one in which both parties have reached a mutual agreement with regard to the reasons behind filing for divorce, as well as the placement of fault in conjunction to the breakdown of the marriage. In the case of the Chris Pontius Divorce, if both Chris Pontius and Claire Nolan opt to file for a divorce uncontested – or unchallenged – in nature, they may have the opportunity to settle outside of court or file for divorce in an uncontested fashion in order to avoid potential media coverage and publicity.

A Contested Plea within the Chris Pontius Divorce

An uncontested divorce is one in which both parties have reached a mutual agreement with regard to the reasons behind filing for divorce, as well as the placement of fault in conjunction to the breakdown of the marriage. In the event that both Chris Pontius and Claire Nolan seem unable or unwilling to negotiate mutual terms of the divorce or reach an agreement upon the identification of fault, the release of certain details of the divorce settlement may be released into public record.

Overview of the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce

The Adnan Khashoggi Divorce marked the dissolution of the marriage between Adnan Khashoggi and Soraya Khashoggi, which was finalized in 1980, which ended the 20-year long marriage. Upon their meeting, Soraya Khashoggi’s name was Sandra Daly; although she had relocated to Saudi Arabia and changed her name, she was a native of the United Kingdom; the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce is listed as being amongst the most expensive in world history. Furthermore, the reasoning for the breakdown of a marriage – regardless of the degree of celebrity status – will typically provide a legal framework for the terms and conditions latent within a divorce settlement:

The Parties Involved in the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce

Adnan Khashoggi achieved his fame as a result of his various business ventures taking place within Saudi Arabia; a multitude of his dealings were in the weapon and arms industry. Adnan Khashoggi is most widely known for his role in the ‘Iran Contra Scandal’, which took place in 1986; during this scandal, members of the Ronald Reagan administration undertook secret weapons dealings with Adnan Khashoggi with the hopes of furthering negations with regard to the release of American hostages:

The couple shared 5 children together; however, in 1999 – subsequent to a paternity test – one the couple’s daughters was determined to be fathered by British politico Jonathan Aitkens in lieu of Adnan Khashoggi

The Plea of ‘No Contest’ within the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce

An uncontested divorce is one in which both parties have reached a mutual agreement with regard to the reasons behind filing for divorce, as well as the placement of fault in conjunction to the breakdown of the marriage. In the case of the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce, both Adnan Khashoggi and Soraya Khashoggi opted to file for a divorce uncontested – or unchallenged – in nature, which retained the classification of the reason for the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce as a result, a bulk of celebrity couples undertaking divorce proceedings opt to either settle outside of court or file for divorce in an uncontested fashion in order to avoid potential media coverage and publicity:

Due to the fact that couple was both wed and divorced outside of the United States of America, alternate legality is applicable with regard to the respective location; however, an uncontested divorce may also be a method in which one or both members of the couple separating cannot – or will not – divulge private affairs with regard to the dissolution of the marriage

The Terms of the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce Settlement

A divorce settlement will typically include 3 primary facets with regard to the terms and conditions set forth by the presiding court official who was responsible for determining spousal support – in the form of alimony, child custody – and subsequent child support payments, and the division of assets. The Adnan Khashoggi Divorce settlement included the following:

Listed as amongst the top 3 most expensive divorces in history, Soraya Khashoggi was given a lump sum of $874 million following the finalization of the Adnan Khashoggi Divorce; Adnan Khashoggi had been estimated to be valued at upwards of $4 billion

A Summary of the Chris Evert Divorce

The Chris Evert Divorce was finalized in 2006, which ended the 18-year marriage between Chris Evert and Andy Mill – the couple was wed in 1988. Speculation surrounding the Chris Evert Divorce suggests that the events leading up to the Chris Evert Divorce were reported as being irreconcilable differences; for those unfamiliar with the Chris Evert Divorce, the celebrity status of Chris Evert and Andy Mill thrust the dissolution of the couple’s marriage into media headlines making it a highly-publicized event in the time that the Chris Evert Divorce had taken place. The reasons for this are not surprising, due to the fact that Chris Evert was regarded as amongst the most sought-after and recognized professional tennis players and female athletes; furthermore, the fact that Andy Mill is also considered to be equally revered as a professional skier made the Chris Evert Divorce ripe for public consumption.

The Terms and Conditions of the Chris Evert Divorce

Although the filing of an uncontested divorce was ideal with regard to the privacy of the celebrity couple, both Chris Evert and Andy Mill were required to adhere to both preexisting terms and conditions, as well as adhere to any subsequent petitions filed, which included the award of spousal support through alimony, child custody of the couple’s 3 children, and the division of the couple’s shared assets:

The Terms of Alimony and the Division of Assets in the Chris Evert Divorce

Alimony – in the form of spousal support – expressed the agreements; Andy Mill petitioned for alimony payments from Chris Evert upon the finalization of the Chris Evert Divorce. The following provision of spousal support was reported to have taken place within the Chris Evert Divorce:

Andy Mill was awarded upwards of $7 million in monies and assets, a home that the couple had shared in Colorado valued at $4 million; Evert retained ownership of the couple’s Florida home valued at nearly $3 million

Petitions Expressed in the Chris Evert Divorce

Custody of the couple’s 3 children would determine both the nature, as well as the classification of the custodial responsibility undertaken by Chris Evert and Andy Mill; the award of sole – or primary – custody allows that parent named as the primary or sole custodian to both maintain residence with the child, as well as become eligible for the receipt of child support payments. The following determination of custody was reported to have taken place within the Chris Evert Divorce:

Within the Chris Evert Divorce, Evert was able to retain primary custody of the couple’s 3 children – Alexander, Nicholas, and Colton

The Determination of Contest within the Chris Evert Divorce

In many cases, the celebrity status enjoyed by both Chris Evert and Andy Mill would be viewed as a gift and a privilege; however, in the case of the Chris Evert Divorce, the media coverage latent within the Chris Evert Divorce proceedings thrust the legal undertakings into the spotlight – a dynamic that was considered to threaten the privacy of the couple facing dissolution. In an attempt to maintain privacy with regard to not only the monetary terms and conditions of the Chris Evert Divorce settlement, but also with regard to the alleged reasons for the Chris Evert Divorce taking place, the respective legal teams belonging to Chris Evert and Andy Mill determined that the Chris Evert Divorce would be filed as uncontested in nature

A Summary of the Alex Rodriguez Divorce

The Alex Rodriguez Divorce was finalized in 2008, which ended the nearly 6-year marriage between Alex Rodriguez and Cynthia Rodriguez – the couple was wed in 2002. Speculation surrounding the Alex Rodriguez Divorce suggests that the events leading up to the Alex Rodriguez Divorce included extramarital affairs and infidelity undertaken by Alex Rodriguez – for those unfamiliar with Alex Rodriguez, he was and is considered to be one of the greatest professional baseball players in the history of the sport; however, according to various media sources, that degree of fame took a toll on his marriage:

Prior to the finalization of the Alex Rodriguez divorce, allegations of extramarital affairs with partners ranging from cocktail waitresses to pop-superstar Madonna

The couple shares 2 children; yet, the youngest of the 2 children, Ella, was born only 3 months prior to the finalization of the Alex Rodriguez divorce – allegations and testimony suggest that Alex Rodriguez was participating in extramarital affairs for a large part of the marriage

The Terms and Conditions of the Alex Rodriguez Divorce

Although the filing of an uncontested divorce was ideal with regard to the privacy of the celebrity couple, both Alex Rodriguez and Cynthia Rodriguez were required to adhere to both preexisting terms and conditions, as well as adhere to any subsequent petitions filed, which included the award of spousal support through alimony, child custody of the couple’s 2 children, and the division of the couple’s shared assets:

The Terms of Alimony and Asset Division in the Alex Rodriguez Divorce

Alimony – in the form of spousal support – expressed the agreements; Cynthia Rodriguez petitioned for alimony payments from Alex Rodriguez upon the finalization of the Alex Rodriguez Divorce. The following provision of spousal support was reported to have taken place within the Alex Rodriguez Divorce:

Cynthia Rodriguez was reported to have requested spousal support from Alex Rodriguez in order to ensure the lifestyle that both her the couple’s 2 children had become accustomed

Although the definitive terms of the Alex Rodriguez divorce settlement were not disclosed, Alex Rodriguez’s personal worth was considered to include a $175 million salary contract granted by the New York Yankees, as well as luxurious homes in New York and Florida

The Terms of the Prenuptial Agreements in the Alex Rodriguez Divorce

The undertaking of a prenuptial agreement will allow for awards – ranging from monetary to custodial in nature – prearranged prior to a couple’s marriage; at the time of the Alex Rodriguez Divorce proceedings, the contents of a prenuptial agreement were not disclosed.

Petitions Expressed in the Alex Rodriguez Divorce

Custody of the couple’s 2 children would determine both the nature, as well as the classification of the custodial responsibility undertaken by Alex Rodriguez and Cynthia Rodriguez; the award of sole – or primary – custody allows that parent named as the primary or sole custodian to both maintain residence with the child, as well as become eligible for the receipt of child support payments. The following determination of custody was reported to have taken place within the Alex Rodriguez Divorce:

Cynthia Rodriguez was reported as both petitioning for – and receiving – primary custody of the 2 children; in tandem with the custodial settlement within the Alex Rodriguez divorce, Cynthia Rodriguez was reported to have requested payment furnished by Alex Rodriguez both for private school tuition and undisclosed gifts