Ahead of the upcoming trial to determine child support and the validity of their premarital agreement, Christine's attorneys are asking for more documentation proving Kevin's finances.
Kevin, 68, objected to the request as his legal team wrote that it is "propounded only for purposes of harassment, is overbroad as to time period and subject matter, burdensome, oppressive and impermissibly compound."
They added that the request is seeking information "not relevant to the subject matter" since "there is no community property" between them in this split.
Additionally, they argued, that Kevin "does not know for a fact if [Christine] engaged in any 'extramarital romantic relationships' before separation and, if so, whether she spent any of his money or charged any expenses in furtherance of her affair(s) on credit cards he paid."
His side added, "[Kevin] has no responsive documents for 'extramarital romantic relationships' in which he engaged because he engaged in none."
Marilyn B. Chinitz, a New York matrimonial and family law attorney at Blank Rome who is not connected to this case, says Christine's request is "not an unusual request" if this were a case involving property division.
However, "The request for 'expenses paid relating to any extramarital romantic relationships' should be stricken as irrelevant and harassing and represents nothing more than a fishing expedition," according to Chinitz.
Christine, 49, is entitled to a $1.5 million payout under the terms of their premarital agreement, which she previously indicated that she felt “pressured” to sign. She was also temporarily awarded $129,755 per month in child support last month. (That ruling is retroactive, meaning that child support will have to be paid forward or back dating back to July 1 if changes are made in the final ruling of the case.)
In a previous filing from July, Kevin claimed that a car purchase Christine made before their April 11 separation could indicate she was thinking ahead to an eventual split.
"Months before separation, although the parties had always leased their automobiles, without [Kevin's] knowledge or consent, [Christine] bought an expensive vehicle for her personal use (probably because the [prenuptial agreement] allows her to take that vehicle with her)," his lawyers wrote at the time.
They added, "Thus, it appears that [Christine] had been planning her exit long before she told [Kevin] in April 2023.
In her response, Christine said in a filing that Kevin's "request includes a myriad of false statements that are no doubt included to play to the press and 'smear' me in the media. I will not address each one."
When the breakup made headlines, a rep for Kevin said "circumstances beyond his control have transpired" that led to the divorce filing. A source told PEOPLE at the time that the divorce "was not anything that [Kevin] wanted or sought, and if he could change the situation, he would."
