In a surprising turn of events, Radar online is reporting that Jon and Kate have actually reached agreement on several of the issues pertaining to the divorce and that the arbitrator expects to be able to finalize everything by the end of the year. The terms of the divorce are confidential, but various sources are reporting the children will have primary residence with Kate. That just means they live with Kate more than 50% of the time, with Jon enjoying visitation.
Jon and Kate were described as icey toward each other, but willing to work things out.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/11/exclusive-gosselin-divorce-will-be-final-end-year-say-jons-attorney
Don't confuse the divorce with Jon and TLC's lawsuit. There is still a moratorium on filming the children that the divorce agreement cannot try to get around. Filming issues will have to be decided via the other breach of contract case first.
12 sediments (sic) from readers:
Just when I thought I couldn't be any more confused.....I am not sure what you mean about the filming of the kids issue. I understand that it is not a matter in the divorce and if Kate has primary custody she can not decide to let the kids film, but what does it have to do with the lawsuit between Jon and TLC? I thought that was only about Jon breaching this contract and not about his refusal to allow the filming of the kids. Again thanks for you opinion...glad I'm not paying you by the hour!
I live in PA and many parents have joint custody but one parent normally has primary PHYSICAL custody of the kids. I wonder if this will be the case.
Yes typically there are three areas of custody you need to specify: Physical custody, Legal Custody, and Primary Residence With.
Legal custody is who makes important decisions such as education, medical and religion. That is a no brainer, that's going to be joint. Full legal custody almost only happens when there is abuse going on or a parent is in prison and unvailable to consult.
Physical will probably be joint as well, because they are sharing custody of the children.
But since it looks like the kids will sort of have a primary residence with Kate, the order will likely say primary residence with mother. Doesn't mean Jon can't visit all the time, take them to his own place, have them spend the night. It's just to have one place designated as their official home.
J & K have said that they agree on the matter of child custody and work out who gets custody and when on a monthly basis on a calendar.
Is this enough for the court to agree with and accept? It sounds awfully weak and unenforceable to me. Although, I guess they can always go back to the courts for help if this agreement falls through.
What do you think about their custody agreement? What is your opinion of Kate getting 'primary' custody? I noticed there was no mention of "legal custody" and I'm assuming that's because the info was leaked by her side and that the agreement states 'joint legal custody'. What do you think?
You mentioned that the issue of filming the kids would be worked out during TLC's breach of contract suit against Jon. But I didn't see any mention of the kids in TLC's filings.
Supposedly the contract that J&K signed with TLC has a clause that states that if any member of the family no longer wants to continue with the show, that the show will stop. Suppose this is true. Jon said he wanted the show to stop and it did. Kate is quoted on a nationally televised show that the clause in the contract is accurate and that Jon had a right to stop filming.
If the clause about being able to stop the show is in the contract -- what does TLC's breach of contract suit against Jon have to do with filming the kids? Whether he did it for the kids or because he wanted to stick it to TLC, does it really matter?
I see the breach of contract and no longer filming the kids as 2 separate issues. Your opinion/explanation of the issues.
Also, (as reported on ROL) what or why did TLC have Jon sign the contract for the minor boys and Kate sign for the girls? What difference does it make which parent signs for which child, etc? Thanks a bunch!!!
In response to these questions: "J & K have said that they agree on the matter of child custody and work out who gets custody and when on a monthly basis on a calendar. Is this enough for the court to agree with and accept? It sounds awfully weak and unenforceable to me. Although, I guess they can always go back to the courts for help if this agreement falls through. What do you think about their custody agreement? What is your opinion of Kate getting 'primary' custody? I noticed there was no mention of "legal custody" and I'm assuming that's because the info was leaked by her side and that the agreement states 'joint legal custody'. What do you think?"
Yes if Jon and Kate have agreed as long as the judge is okay with it and a family law order is drawn up that properly reflects their agreement the court will accept it. It's absolutely enforceable if it's in a family law order issued by the court. It's not weak, in fact most courts treat family law orders with a lot of deference. Pretty much the only way (except in a few limited circumstances) they can get that order changed is to drag the other back into family court for a modification, and they would have to prove the change is in the chilren's best interest. Or they could always just mutually agree and not go to court.
Legal custody will be joint, that is a given. As I explained before, sole legal is incredibly hard to get and nothing in this situation calls for it. And I agree, the other side doesn't want to leak anything favorable to Jon.
As for Kate getting primary, that is pretty normal and expected. I bet you anything they've agreed to let Kate move into the mansion with the kids. Therefore, by default their primary residence is their mother's residence, therefore she gets primary. Primary really doesn't mean much. A father can have visits 7 days a week with a family law order that says primary custody with mother. PHYSICAL custody is what is important--who will get the kids what percentage of the time. For that all we know is that's going to be shared in some form. Of course they can try to spin primary custody as some big victory for Kate when really it isn't. All it means is, what is the children's address.
Thanks a bunch, Administrator! You always break the legal lingo down so even I can understand it.
Could you explain how the breach of contract suit could affect the kids being filmed? Re the question at 6:55am. Is there any way TLC winning that suit would mean the kids would be filmed again? Or, would filming the kids be a separate agreement granted by Jon and unrelated to the suit by TLC against him? Thanks!
What is up with the new petition Jon's former attorney filed? Is he owed money?
I'm not exactly sure now how filming of the kids will play into all this. Allegedly the contract had a provision that either parent could pull the kids at any time. Unless I've forgotten I don't think that contract has been made available publically, so I don't know for sure what it says. I think what's pretty clear is that when Jon pulled the kids, TLC retaliated by suing him. Up until then they had been sort of putting up with him.
I find it incredibly unlikely any judge will force Jon to film the kids. They are HIS kids and there is way too much evidence the filming is not in their best interest. A more probable scenerio is there may be a provision in the family law order that says the parents must mutually agree on filming. We'll have to see.
I think TLC is hoping to wear Jon down until he cracks and allows the kids to be filmed. Realistically that's probably not gonna happen. I wouldn't even be surprised if the kids are blurred out on Kate's new show, if Jon doesn't consent to filming.
I could be remembering this incorrectly, but didn't a judge tell Charlie Sheen that his children COULD be filmed for that psycho ex-wife's show? Only wondering if that's a portent of things to come for the Gosselin 8 ...
A judge did say that. But that was a different judge in a different state and different circumstances. Jon and Kate's judge is under no obligation to do what that judge did.
The thing is the contract supposedly provided that Jon or Kate could pull the kids at any time. So TLC can hardly say that the contract was valid and should be enforced, but that Jon should still be forced to film the kids. Their own contract says he doesn't have to!
Post a Comment
Want to see your comment published? Follow a few simple rules:
1. Do not use Anonymous. Pick a name (click Name/URL to type in a name) and stick to the same name.
2. Anonymous insider stories should be emailed to us directly (in confidence). They will not be posted here unless we can verify the validity, such as with photos. This is not to discourage legitimate insiders from speaking out, but to guard against all the fake stories out there.
3. No insulting other posters or picking fights, refusing to let things go and move on. Stop with the snotty comments--they will be rejected. Treat people here like how you would talk to the person you most respect in your life, it's just pleasant that way.
4. No trash talking other blogs/bloggers here.