Overview of the Marie Osmond Divorce

The Marie Osmond Divorce marked the dissolution of the marriage between Marie Osmond and Brian Blosil; the Marie Osmond Divorce was finalized in 2007, which ended the 20-yearlong marriage, which took place in 1986:

Although the case of the Marie Osmond 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

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.

Background of the Marie Osmond Divorce

Marie Osmond is perhaps most commonly recognized for her participation in the eponymously-named television shows in which and her family – the Osmonds – were featured as stars. While the television program ‘The Osmonds’ propelled Marie Osmond into the realm of celebrity, her 1976 variety show – ‘Donny and Marie’ starring both herself and her brother Donny Osmond solidified her status as a celebrity. In addition, Marie Osmond also enjoyed a career as a country music singer spanning from the 1970s to the 1980s:

Following a prior divorce taking place in 1985, Marie Osmond and Brian Blosil married in 1986; the couple shares 2 natural children and 5 adopted children

Although the couple separated within 1998, both Marie Osmond and Brian Blosil had managed to reconcile their difference and preserve their respective union in lieu of a Marie Osmond divorce

The Plea of ‘No Contest’ within the Marie Osmond Divorce

The Marie Osmond divorce settlement was publicized as an amicable one; both Marie Osmond and Brian Blosil maintained that although they felt the utmost respect for one another, the couple’s marriage had reached a point of irreconcilable differences – as a result, the couple underwent the filing for the Marie Osmond divorce under within an uncontested nature:

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 Marie Osmond Divorce, both Marie Osmond and Brian Blosil opted to file for a divorce uncontested – or unchallenged – in nature, which retained the classification of the reason for the Marie Osmond 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

The Terms of the Marie Osmond 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. However, the Marie Osmond divorce settlement was kept under wraps and the details were not released to the public.

Background of the Martha Stewart Insider Trading Arrest

Taking place in 2004, the Martha Stewart Insider trading hearing was one of the most prominent and notorious of its kind within the realm of celebrity involvement with securities fraud, in which the beloved television personality and home décor expert was made aware of unauthorized and privileged information with regards to an investment in which she had made under the counsel of her friend Sam Waskal – Sam Waskal was the owner of the company whose shares Martha Stweart had purchased.

The Details of the Martha Stewart Insider Trading Charges

Sam Waskal owned the ‘ImClone pharmaceutical company who had been planning on releasing a revolutionary drug to treat cancer; due to the fact that the drug was considered to be highly-anticipated, Martha Stewart – who was in ownership of 4,000 shares – anticipated a large return. However, Sam Waskal had discovered that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) – the regulatory body maintained by the Federal Government – was not going to allow for the release of the drug:

Presumably, the drug did not meet the FDA’s regulatory standards for medication. Subsequent to learning this, Sam Waskal conveyed this information to Martha Stewart, who quickly sold her ImClone shares in the fear of a huge financial loss as a result of the rejection being released

However, the information furnished to Martha Stewart was considered to be not only unavailable to the general public, but is indicative of potential increases or decreases with regard to that company’s stocks – insider trading is classified as privileged individuals party to information involving the trade and exchange of stocks outside of the knowledge of the general populace

Martha Stewart Insider Trading Sentencing

Subsequent to her trial, the following punitive recourse was sentenced with regard to Martha Stewart and her criminal activity:

Martha Stewart was incarcerated from October of 2008 to March of 2005

She was mandated to undergo a 2-year probationary period within which she would be subject to supervision

Martha Stewart would be unable to serve as either Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of any publically-traded company for a period of 5-years’ time

The Notion of Celebrity within the Martha Stewart Insider Trading Arrest

The Martha Stewart Insider Trading trial – akin to the vast expanse of celebrity hearings – run the risk for heightened notoriety for both the presiding judge – as well as for the legal venue – there exists supplemental considerations that are undertaken within any celebrity trial. Due to the fact that the public eye will be fixated on a celebrity trial, much like that public was during the Martha Stewart Insider Trading, the legal obligation of a judge is to exact justice in accordance to the precepts upon which the United States’ legal system was founded – in an unbiased and objective fashion:

Due to the fact that celebrities typically possess higher earnings and greater fortunes than individuals considered to account for the median members of society, the implementation of financial recourse – in the form of fines or fees – is considered by many legal professionals to be subject to inefficiency with regard to punitive recourse; within the Martha Stewart Insider Trading trial, many individuals suspected that the enforcement of a median monetary payment furnished by Martha Stewart would neither affect her finances nor serve as an effective punishment

However, since justice must be exacted in an objective fashion, other individuals claimed that prejudiced enacted with regard to the sentencing of celebrities – in the form of fines or fees that exceed those that would be exacted onto the median citizen of the United States – would be equally ineffective

The Origins of the Mel Gibson Divorce Case

Actor Mel Gibson has been considered to be amongst the most recognized and sought-after talents in Hollywood; oftentimes credited with dashing good looks in conjunction with his inspirational character portrayals, the Mel Gibson divorce hearings involving the actor and wife Oksana Grigorieva – a Russian model and aspiring singer – have been classified as anything but attractive. From harassing and abusive phone calls to alleged bouts of domestic violence, the Mel Gibson divorce case has allowed concerned and curious spectators the opportunity to witness the complete and utter dissolution of a marriage.

Mel Gibson Divorce Telephone Calls

In July of 2010 Oksana Grigorieva released the audio of multiple telephone calls that she had taped, which involved her conversing with Mel Gibson; the audio of these telephone calls are considered to be extremely vulgar, abusive, cruel, racist, violent, and defamatory – many resources offering the audio of these telephone calls for visitors to access express a variety of warning s with regard to the nature of the content. Oksana Grigorieva, whose release of these telephone calls has allowed her to enter them as evidence and testimony with regard to the Mel Gibson divorce hearing.

Possible Entrapment in the Melgibson Divorce Case

Oksana Grigorieva has been criticized by Mel Gibson, as well as various individuals advocating for Gibson in the Mel Gibson divorce case, as baiting him to respond angrily and harshly:

Many reports surfacing with regard to the Mel Gibson divorce have revealed that Gibson displays signs of both rage and substance abuse; advocates for Gibson accuse Oksana Grigorieva of exploiting the aforementioned ailments

However, upon listening to the telephone calls, many individuals – including the Judge of the Mel Gibson divorce case – have mandated that regardless of the nature of the release of the audio, the sentiments expressed by Gibson cannot be excused

Domestic Violence and the Mel Gibson Divorce Case

Within the Mel Gibson divorce case, Oksana Grigorieva maintained that Gibson struck her on various occasions; amongst the most shocking accusations with in the Mel Gibson divorce case, Oksana Grigorieva expressed that Gibson had physically abused her while she was holding their child. Although the claim of Gibson striking Oksana Grigorieva while holding their child was never substantiated, the recorded telephone calls show Gibson admitting to striking Oksana Grigorieva with little to remorse with regard to his actions.

The Plea Agreement for the Mel Gibson Divorce Case

The terms of the Mel Gibson Divorce Case have allowed for Oksana Grigorieva to remain in custody of the couple’s child; Gibson is allowed supervised visits conditional upon his behavior by Court officers. Furthermore, the following stipulations are required of Gibson within the Mel Gibson Divorce Case:

Gibson is permitted to enter a ‘West Plea’ for domestic abuse; the terms of a West Plea allow Gibson to enter a guilty plea in tandem with allowing him to maintain his innocence

Gibson is required to engage in 16 hours of court-mandated community service, as well as a year-long program of anger management and substance abuse counseling

Gibson was placed on probation for a year and half, as well; in the event that he and Oksana Grigorieva are required to interact over the telephone – due to the fact that he is not permitted near her – she is legally-allowed to record the telephone conversations

The Background of the Melissa Etheridge Divorce

On April 15th, 2010, same-sex couple Melissa Etheridge and Tammy Lynn Michael announced a separation, in addition to a prospective Melissa Etheridge divorce settlement in the event that a divorce is finalized; due to the fact that same-sex marriage was not considered to be legal at the time of the couple’s union, both Melissa Etheridge and Tammy Lynn Michaels undertook a commitment ceremony in the State of California. A finalized Melissa Etheridge divorce would end a 7 year marriage between the couple who wed on April of 2003; in 2006, Melissa Etheridge announced that Tammy Lynne Michaels was pregnant with the couple’s child – subsequent to undertaking an artificial insemination procedure:

With regard to the Melissa Etheridge divorce, she has stated that the couple had undergone irreconcilable differences; legislation addressing domestic partnerships – akin to those enacted by same-sex couples – mandate the determination of 3 primary facets with regard to the terms and conditions set forth by the presiding court

These facts are the determination of spousal support – in the form of alimony, child custody – and subsequent child support payments, and the division of assets; since the fact that the Melissa Etheridge divorce has been filed recently, the associated pleas – with regard to the determination of fault and challenge within the filing – have yet to be named

The only details that have surfaced include Tammy Lynn Michaels requested spousal support from a potential Melissa Etheridge divorce settlement, as well as joint custody of the couple’s twins

Who Was Involved in the Melissa Etheridge Divorce Filing?

Singer Melissa Etheridge has been responsible for both the composition and performance of such massive hits including ‘Come to My Window’, I’m the Only One’, and ‘The Weakness in Me’; in addition to her prolific musical career, Melissa Etheridge has served as a public advocate and staunch lobbyist for gay rights – Melissa Etheridge is an openly-gay performer and icon who has served as an inspiration for countless activist groups.

The Plea within the Melissa Etheridge Divorce Settlement

The following are some potential outcomes upon the determination of the plea within the Melissa Etheridge divorce petition:

The Plea of ‘No Contest’ within the Melissa Etheridge 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 Melissa Etheridge Divorce, if both Melissa Etheridge and Tammy Lynn Michaels 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.

The Plea of ‘Contest’ and Challenge within the Melissa Etheridge 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 Melissa Etheridge and Tammy Lynn Michaels 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.

Facts about the Michael Douglas Divorce

Michael Douglas is an American actor who met Diandra Luker at an inauguration ceremony for the upcoming presidential elect Jimmy Carter in March of 1977; at the time of their meeting Michael Douglas was 33 years old and Diandra Luker was 19 years old – the Michael Douglas divorce took place in 1998. While at the time of their marriage, Michael Douglas was not considered to have reached the height of celebrity that he would experience within forthcoming years; over the course of the marriage – prior to the Michael Douglas divorce – Michael Douglas became one of the highest-paid and most sought-after actors of his time:

Michael Douglas has graced the screen in a multitude of films; amongst the films for which he considered to be the renowned include Wall Street, Fatal Attraction, The War of the Roses, The Jewel of the Nile, Wonderboys, and Traffic

Michael Douglas and Diandra Douglas share one child named Cameron, who was born in 1978; due to his age at the time of the Michael Douglas divorce, the need to establish custody for Cameron was unnecessary

Throughout the marriage of Michael Douglas and Diandra Douglas, the couple was not without their share of domestic difficulty; in 1992, Michael Douglas confessed to an addiction to both drugs and alcohol and underwent treatment in a rehabilitation facility

Michael Douglas was also rumored to have undertaken extramarital partners; however, his alleged infidelity was never substantiated

The Terms and Conditions of the Michael Douglas Divorce

The Michael Douglas divorce – in conjunction with the respective calculations of alimony payments, the division of assets, and supplementary spousal support offered to Diandra Douglas from Michael Douglas – is considered to be amongst the most expensive in history. Although the terms of the Michael Douglas divorce settlement were kept highly-private, the following details were released:

Diandra Douglas walked away with an alleged sum of $45 million subsequent to the Michael Douglas divorce

Diandra Douglas was also awarded the couple’s formerly-shared homes in Beverley Hills, California and the island of Majorca

The Determination of Contest within the Michael Douglas Divorce

In many cases, the celebrity status enjoyed by both Michael Douglas and Diandra Douglas would be viewed as a gift and a privilege; however, in the case of the Michael Douglas Divorce, the media coverage latent within the Michael Douglas Divorce proceedings thrust the legal undertakings into the spotlight – a dynamic that was considered to threaten the privacy of the couple facing dissolution:

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 Michael Douglas Divorce settlement, but also with regard to the alleged reasons for the Michael Douglas Divorce taking place, the respective legal teams belonging to Michael Douglas and Diandra Douglas determined that the Michael Douglas Divorce would be filed as uncontested in nature

A Summary of the Michael Jordan Divorce

Basketball icon Michael Jordan and his wife Juanita Jordan filed for divorce in 2006 after 17 years of marriage; the couple was married in 1989. Prior to this particular Michael Jordan divorce, the couple underwent a close-call with a divorce in 2002 subsequent to rumors of infidelity surfacing with regard to Michael Jordan; yet, both Michael Jordan and Juanita Jordan managed to stay together until 2006. The couple shares 3 children. In an attempt to maintain privacy with regard to not only the monetary terms and conditions of the Michael Jordan Divorce settlement, but also with regard to the alleged reasons for the Michael Jordan Divorce taking place, the respective legal teams belonging to Michael Jordan and Juanita Jordan determined that the Michael Jordan Divorce would be filed as uncontested in nature. However, the allegations of Jordan’s infidelity became a reality during the Michael Jordan divorce; reports stated that Michael Jordan had paid extramarital partners for their respective silence in conjunc
tion with affairs he had undertaken.

Why Was the Michael Jordan Divorce the Most Expensive?

Basketball superstar Michael Jordan earned his fame and notoriety both within the realm of athletics, as well as within the realm of marketing, entertainment, and endorsements. Both prior and subsequent to the Michael Jordan divorce, the basketball icon has been the face of Gatorade, Nike, and Hanes; Jordan’s value is reported to exceed an estimated $500 million.

The Terms and Conditions of the Michael Jordan Divorce

Although the filing of an uncontested divorce was ideal with regard to the privacy of the celebrity couple, both Michael Jordan and Juanita Jordan 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 in the Michael Jordan Divorce

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

Juanita Jordan received a sum of $168 million in spousal support

Due to the fact the couple’s 3 children exceeded 18 years of age, the determination of custody within the Michael Jordan divorce was not applicable

The Division of Assets in the Michael Jordan Divorce

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

In addition to the $168 million payment furnished to Juanita Jordan following the Michael Jordan settlement, she was also given ownership of the couple’s luxury home in Chicago, Illinois

Overview of the Neil Diamond Divorce

The Neil Diamond Divorce marked the dissolution of the marriage between Neil Diamond and Marsha Murphy; the Neil Diamond Divorce was finalized in 1994, which ended the 33-year long marriage. Although the case of the Neil Diamond 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:

Although many celebrity divorces may tend to retain hostility or anger, such was not the case in the Neil Diamond divorce; despite the suspicion of extramarital affairs undertaken by Neil Diamond, which resulted in Marsha Murphy petitioning for half of his fortune, Neil Diamond responded that his former wife deserved the settlement amount and ‘was worth every penny’

Neil Diamond continued to thank Marsha Murphy for what he had described as unwavering and undying support undertaken by her throughout the couple’s marriage; he maintains this claim long after the finalization of the Neil Diamond divorce took place

The Parties Involved in the Neil Diamond Divorce

Neil Diamond is considered to be amongst the most successful singers and songwriters in world history; prior to the Neil Diamond divorce, he was valued at an estimated $300 million – Diamond is responsible for the composition of seminal songs, such as ‘I Write the Songs’ and ‘Sweet Caroline’. He met Marsha Murphy in 1965, where at the time, Murphy was employed as a production assistant; the couple shares 2 children.

The Plea of ‘No Contest’ within the Neil Diamond 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 Neil Diamond Divorce, both Neil Diamond and Marcia Murphy opted to file for a divorce uncontested – or unchallenged – in nature, which retained the classification of the reason for the Neil Diamond 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:

The nature of the Neil Diamond divorce resulting in an uncontested settlement has been presumed to have taken place as a result of the couple’s desire to keep the details of the Neil Diamond divorce secretive; prior to the Neil Diamond divorce, Marsha Murphy discovered that he had undertaken various extramarital affairs – in many cases, these events of infidelity were highly-publicized by the media

Neil Diamond and Marsha Murphy cited irreconcilable differences as the reasoning behind the dissolution of their marriage

The Terms of the Neil Diamond 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. However, subsequent to the ruling of the presiding judge, the following judicial review was set forth with regard to the terms of the Neil Diamond Divorce settlement:

Marsha Murphy walked away from the Neil Diamond divorce settlement with an estimated $150 million, which was reported to be half of Neil Diamond’s fortune; the Neil Diamond divorce settlement has been cited as one of the most expensive in history

Background of the Nick Hogan Arrest

The following details outline the shocking details of the 2007 Nick Hogan arrest and sentencing of Nick Hogan subsequent to his involvement in an automobile accident resulting in the passenger in the vehicle, John Graziano, withstanding life-changing injuries; the accident took place in Clearwater, Florida. Although Nick Hogan was not considered to have earned his celebrity status, he is the son of famed wrestler Terry Bollea, who is known as ‘Hulk Hogan’ to fans of professional wrestling on a worldwide basis. The cause of the accident in which Nick Hogan and John Graziano were involved was determined to be the result of both intoxicated driving, as well as reckless endangerment in the form of ‘drag racing’:

Who Was Involved?

Reports released with regard to the details of the car accident involving the vehicle that Nick Hogan was driving – in tandem with the injuries resulting from the accident itself – included 3 individuals driving one of Hulk Hogan’s cars, while Nick Hogan, 17, and John Graziano, 22, were reported as occupying the other vehicle. As previously mentioned, Nick Hogan – whose birthname is Nick Bollea – is the son of wrestling legend Hulk Hogan; John Graziano was a friend of Nick Hogan’s and a marine.

What Happened?

While the 5 individuals were en route to their destination, both Nick Hogan and the driver of the other vehicle belonging to Hulk Hogan began to race; reports submitted by fellow motorists and witnesses reported the cars to be traveling anywhere between 70 and 90 miles per hour – these reports alleged that Nick Hogan had been doubling the expressed speed limitations of that particular roadway. In the midst of driving, Nick Hogan began to drive outside of the lane as the vehicle spun around and sustained a massive impact against a concrete divider on the highway; reports state that the car also impacted a tree. Although Nick Hogan was wearing a seatbelt at the time of the impact, John Graziano was not – as a result, Graziano suffered irrevocable and debilitating injuries.

The Consequences of Nick Hogan’s Actions

After being airlifted to the nearest hospital within the area of Tamp, Florida, Nick Hogan was discharged later that day; however, John Graziano had suffered irreversible damage to his neurological system, which resulted in what would be determined to ensure that he would be in the care of assisted living specialists for the duration of his life.

Criminal Charges Filed Against Nick Hogan

The trial of Nick Hogan was a fairly simple one; the case details surfacing after the accident had revealed that Nick Hogan had a blood alcohol level of 0.05 at the time of the accident; although not above the legal limit, Nick Hogan was a minor at the time of the accident – in the State of Florida, a blood alcohol level exceeding 0.02 displayed by a minor is a criminal offense:

Nick Hogan was charged with a felony, which resulted from injuries sustained through the undertaking of reckless operation of a motor vehicle

Nick Hogan was charged with driving while under the influence of alcohol, which contributed to damage or injury; while Nick Hogan’s attorney attempted to substantiate that john Graziano’s injuries resulted from his failure to wear a seatbelt in lieu of Nick Hogan’s intoxication, the judge quickly dismissed them

Nick Hogan was sentenced to 8 months of incarceration, the loss of his license for 3 years, 500 hours of court-ordered community service, and a 5-year term of probation

Overview of the Olivia Wilde Divorce

In the event that the Olivia Wilde Divorce filing becomes finalized – which took place on February 8th, 2011 – it could mark the end of the marriage between actor Olivia Wilde and Italian filmmaker and Prince Tao Ruspoli. The couple was married on June 7th, 2003 – the marriage was enacted as a private ceremony that had taken place in an abandoned school bus in order to maintain privacy. As per the divorce hearing and settlement associated with the Olivia Wilde Divorce – which can range from an out-of-court settlement to a divorce hearing – the reasoning behind 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 Olivia Wilde Divorce

Olivia Wilde has starred in various television and motion pictures, including the feature film of Tron, as well as a consistent role on the television drama House; Tao Ruspoli has not only directed a multitude of Italian documentary films, but he has also been responsible for the direction of documentaries that have received international acclaim, such as Behind the Wheel and Being in the World. Both Olivia Wilde and Tao Ruspoli are renowned for the maintenance of their privacy, and as a result, few details have emerged with regard to the Olivia Wilde divorce filing; the details that have been made available are as follows:

The Olivia Wilde divorce filing was set forth on the grounds of irreconcilable differences; although the couple had been separated prior to the filing of the Olivia Wilde divorce, neither Olivia Wilde nor Tao Ruspoli were able to salvage their marriage

The couple currently share no children

Legal Venue of the Olivia Wilde Divorce Filing

The Olivia Wilde Divorce was set forth before the Superior Court of California, which is located in the City of Los Angeles.

The Plea within the Olivia Wilde 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 Olivia Wilde 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 within the Olivia Wilde divorce petition:

The Plea of ‘No Contest’ within the Olivia Wilde Divorce Filing

Due to the fact the couple filed for the Olivia Wilde divorce under the terms of irreconcilable differences, the nature of the divorce is considered to be uncontested. 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 Olivia Wilde Divorce, if both Olivia Wilde and Tao Ruspoli 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.

The Background of the Mick Jagger Divorce

Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall began their romantic relationship in 1977 subsequent to their initial meeting in London, England in 1976. The couple ended their marriage in 1999; Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall share 4 children – Elizabeth, James, Georgia May, and Gabriel.

The Annulment of Marriage

After nearly 2 decades without being married, the 2 underwent a marriage ceremony in in Bali that was enacted in Hindu fashion; as a result, the marriage between Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall permitted to be annulled in lieu of a divorce. Upon discovering that Mick Jagger had engaged in an extramarital affair that resulted in him fathering the child of another woman, she petitioned for a divorce.

Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall

Michael Philip Jagger – more commonly known as ‘Mick Jagger’ – is considered to be one of the most prolific and prominent musicians of the 20th and 21st centuries; as the singer of the seminal rock and roll group ‘The Rolling Stones’, Mick Jagger has been responsible for the performance and composition of some of the most widely-recognized and profitable songs in history. As if Mick Jagger’s fame would not cause any news relating to him to be thrust into public consumption, his former wife Jerry Hall was an American supermodel – it was certainly no surprise that that Mick Jagger divorce was both one of the most highly publicized and expensive in history.

The Terms and Conditions of the Mick Jagger Divorce Settlement

Due to the annulment of the couple’s marriage in lieu of a divorce, the proceeding inherent within the Mick Jagger divorce settlement, which is legally defined as an annulment settlement, the following illustrates the manner in which the dissolution of the couple’s marriage took place:

The estimated net worth of Mick Jagger at the time of the Mick Jagger divorce was alleged to be $325 million

Due in part to both the nature of allegations of infidelity in tandem with Mick Jagger’s dispute with regard to the viability of the marriage ceremony, Jerry Hall was given an alimony payment ranging between $15 million and $25 million – the details of the Mick Jagger divorce settlement were kept secret

The Determination of Legality within the Mick Jagger Divorce

In many cases, the celebrity status enjoyed by both Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall would be viewed as a gift and a privilege; however, in the case of the Mick Jagger Divorce, the media coverage latent within the Mick Jagger Divorce proceedings thrust the legal undertakings into the spotlight – a dynamic that was considered to threaten the privacy of the couple facing dissolution:

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 the case of the Mick Jagger divorce – or annulment, the couple was able to be privy to extenuating circumstances due to the disputable nature of their initial marriage