Former supermodel Linda Evangelista is suing his child's father, Salma Hayek's husband François-Henri Pinault, for a small fortune in child support.
The child support fight between supermodel Linda Evangelista and her baby daddy, PPR’s chief executive (and Mr. Salma Hayek), François-Henri Pinault, is shaping up to be really ugly.
The New York Daily News has a lot of the details about Evangelista’s over-the-top lifestyle and her child support demands, which, if she wins, could be record-breaking.
In case you forgot, the duo dated from September 2005 thru January 2006 (which is, you know, not a very long time) and Evangelista was pregnant when they broke up.
Evangelista didn’t reveal the paternity of her child, Augie, until she filed court papers against Pinault for child support this past summer. And now she’s really going for it.
The NYDN is reporting that Evangelista is asking for a whopping $46,000 a month in child support payments. To put that into perspective, the previous New York state child support payment record is held by Diddy, who shells out $19,000 a month to the mother of his kid.
So why exactly does she need that much money? A peek into her current lifestyle shows that she still has an “I-don’t-get-out-of-bed-for-less-than-$10,000-a-day” attitude. Evangelista is claiming her son needs a driver and bodyguards for protection. She also employs round-the-clock nannies.
Apparently a judge questioned her about why this is necessary, and she replied:
“When I work, it can be a 16-hour day. On days when I do not work, I am working on my image. I have to hit the gym. I have beauty appointments. I have to work toward my next job and maintaining my image, just like an athlete.”
As far as living arrangements, Evangelista has a “stunning penthouse in Chelsea” but also has an Upper East Side apartment for…are you ready?…PLAYDATES. Playdates! We bet Augie’s friends love going there after school. Just imagine what the snacks are like. Anyway. Evangelista is arguing that her child deserves the same kind of home that Pinault’s daughter with Hayek, Valentina has, which is a $13 million mansion.Jacked from The Fashionista
11 comments:
She works; she needs to get off of that. How much does the little boy NEED? Why would she need around the clock nannies for? If the little boy is in school, then she can do some of what she needs while he is in school. Some people.....
This is nothing more than trying to keep up with the Joneses or the Hayeks ennyway. As long as both children have the same lifestyle and I'm not talking about living in a mansion, but as long as they get the same equal schooling and all then she needs to can the rest and move on. HATERS boy....
WAIT A HOT MINUTE HOLD UP. WHEN THE HELL DID LINDA E HAVE A KID?
You know... I normally will kick a tramp for trying to juice a fool in such a manner. BUT, not this time. WHY?
Because this fool is worth over 13 Billion, 13 fucking Billion. If he paid her 2 million a month till the boy turned 18 it would not even put a dent in his cash flow, wich is growing all the time. so its better to just pay the slag and add a stipulation that she cant get any more cause 46,000.00 a month is like a crumb on his plate for real!
I swear I read this same article over a year ago! Da hell?
He should just go ahead and pay her. If he didn't have all that money those women wouldn't even let his ugly ass sniff their coochie
Word. This fool got Salma and Linda, he probably tapped Halle and Angelina without the press knowing about it,lol.
@ Truth. These women certainly make great money individually and don't necessarily need a man or spouse to "support" them, however I think they probably subscribe to the same schools of thought as two types of "regular" women: 1- trap/have kids with a man who makes more $ than you so you can get paid and 2- don't settle with a man who makes less than you or can't provide. Eg- Bey is a multi-millionaire who could have married any man for love, but she married JayZ because she wanted to unite with a man making as much or more than her. It is what it is.
And men will stop using $ to pull women when they are: a) no-longer considered providers and women don't consider their financial status before committing to them and b) are no-longer vying for superficial women (those who are ok with men buying their time/youth/beauty with $ and objects) for superficial reasons (wanting a pretty girl on their arm to stunt).
Attractive, intelligent, fun, (extremely) successful, caring, well-mannered people are HARD to come by. No one's perfect- but finding a good man or woman with all those qualities is rare. If a person is lacking in some qualities money (for men) and beauty --or personality-- for women are great and common equalizers.
LOL The lame who thinks he needs to throw some $ your way to get some play and values every second of that time is better than the fine, charismatic broke dude who charms the pants off of you and leaves you when he's had his fill.........
That being said- I don't know how they did it. Ain't enough money in the world to get with old billionaires slanging it to every/any pretty girl trying to get a payday. STDs have to come with those pregnancies!! Smh
Linda is serious about that doe though- 46Gs/month? She miiiiight spent 20% of that on their child.
He's a billionaire?! Whoa, that's a lot of money. Quite interesting to see the outcome of this child support case. Because of his wealth, she just may get the $48k a month. Interesting.
48k/mo? That's only $552,000 per year. This guy is a MULTI-BILLIONAIRE... That's nothing... The kid is the one missing out...
Post a Comment