Nor do I. A lot of people here think this was a win for Ioan. I disagree.
I looked back and re-read the stipulation mAlice backed out of at the last minute back in May 2022 that had been negotiated when Leon was still on board. When you look closely and compare, several things stand out:
- Point 2 of that stipulation refers to one appointed broker, now suddenly there are two. Lots of potential to stall things while two brokers haggle about the price, advertising, showings, etc. And is it a sure thing that the commission won't be higher because they presumably have to split it?
- Point 3 addresses a 30 day lease back, now suddenly it's "at least" 30 days. She will interpret the "at least 30 days" as "indefinitely." I can hear the whine fest already about not being able to find something suitable on such short notice when she's oh-so-broke and the baybeez have nothing to eat, not being able to move with the baybeez during the school year when they are already so traumatized about losing their childhood home, etc., etc., etc. Or does anyone really believe mAlice is out apartment-hunting today?! What buyer is going to offer a good price knowing the hassles they're going to have getting this squatter off the property?
- Point 5 states "Respondent shall maintain the La Jolla Residence in a clean and showable condition." We all have our suspicions about the state of that house now, but no such mention in the new document. Or do we believe mAlice is doing the spring cleaning of the century as we speak? There are also other references in the original stipulation to home improvements, which makes me wonder if Ioan was planning on sprucing the place up a bit before putting it on the market, which mAlice would have objected to because she wants the place rundown so it won't sell.
- No mention about putting mAlice on the title in the May 2022 stipulation. That bit made me laugh out loud when I read her preposterous "response" last week. I asked myself why on God's green earth would that be an issue 17 years after the house was purchased and 15 years after the wedding. But now, there it is. Why add notarial costs, etc., now in the middle of a horrendous divorce on a property that is being sold to avoid foreclosure? Huh?! Anyone know what's going on with this? Could this even be opening a back door to getting the pre-nup thrown out?
I really have been asking myself since the news broke yesterday why Ioan even filed a response to her response last Friday, then signed off on this on Tuesday. We were all cheering, thinking he and Anne finally had the beast exactly where they wanted her and then they agree to this watered-down version of a stipulation that actually had some teeth back in May. I suspect he only filed the response on Friday to get on the record about some of the lies she told there in her ramblings (which had nothing to do with the subject at hand, namely sale of the house) and to reemphasize how mAlice is wrecking his career (there were some more examples of threatening messages to him about destroying him in the attachments on Friday). This makes me think she has been contacting potential employers again.
Which brings me back to the DVRO and the judge rejecting Ioan's request to forbid her from contacting his employers, past, present or potential. I still can't believe that was dismissed, really thought that would be a no-brainer, given all the evidence Ioan had presented in his DVRO petition with threats and references to her contacting former managers, etc. My hope is that Ioan and his team stand fast about the DVRO breaches and about custody. It's long overdue that they go for the jugular, this stipulation about the house was not it.
Anyway, long rant, maybe I'm nitpicking about some of this, but somehow I have a feeling mAlice got a bunch of concessions again that she will not use to improve her and the children's lot, but will use against Ioan again. I think the house will ultimately go into foreclosure.
. I hope this doesn't hold up the house being sold either.
. She has to be there at 08:30, but that doesn't mean that's when her case will be heard, I assume?
