Celebrity Justice
Playmate Accused of Stealing from Children

2009 Playmate of the year Ida Ljungvist Sure she's naughty -- but 2009 Playmate of the Year Ida Ljungqvist is also accused of being a very bad girl ... the kind who steals child support from someone else's family.

Ida -- (32-21-35) -- is being sued by a soon-to-be divorced woman named Katrina Kantner, who claims the centerfold and Mr. Kantner schemed to funnel thousands of dollars in child support money meant for Katrina and her children.

Kantner claims her husband has given Ida over $90,000 in cash and gifts -- while during the same period, he's been stiffing Katrina out of the $10,000 a month he owes her in child and spousal support.

In the suit, filed last week in L.A. County Superior Court, Kantner says Ida knew exactly what she was doing -- and wants all the money back, plus interest.

If you're judging Ida from the accusations in this case -- be careful, one of her turn-off's is "close-mindedness."



Tags: 2009 playmate, 2009Playmate, ida ljungvist, IdaLjungvist, playboy, playmate

Relevant Posts

Reader Comments

(Page 2 of 5) Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

16. Uh, this case is an open and shut.
Whether she got gifts or money, so what? It's not her job to care what or where this guy gets his money. It was HIS choice and the chick can only go after HIM. Sounds like someone is a little jealous and money hungry.

This lady is trying to get paid off of this models success and get her Oprah moment. Sit your ash down lady. Get a job.

Posted at 7:22AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Sigh....

17. Katrina Kantner is a bigger lying worthless whore than TMZ

Posted at 7:24AM on Jun 5th 2009 by TRUTH

18. Comment#13 Hater...but here's the number 877-205-9796 *C* is for Cookie thats good enough for me. Kevin, escrow MFer

Posted at 7:25AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Meg502

19. LOL - So strange looking with that chest full of PLASTIC!

Posted at 8:22AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Weezi Jefferson

20. Oh please - she stole nothing from those kids. She isn't her responsibility to question where the money for the gifts she received came from.

Oh, and since when is child support for the soon to be ex as well as the children??? Child support is for the children, that's why it is called CHILD SUPPORT.

Sounds like the soon to be ex wife just wants more money and bleed that man dry.

Posted at 9:02AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Just My 2 Cents

21. No such thing as boobs too big

Posted at 9:09AM on Jun 5th 2009 by jeff

22. Lousy reporting. This will never see a court room, legally she owes this woman nothing. Doesn't stand a chance.

Posted at 9:25AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Matthew Lynch

23. If she was complicit in helping him hide the money while using it for herself, then she is liable with him.
Besides, what kind of woman would allow a man to spend his child support on her instead of his kids? Ida is obviously the money hungry bi*ch.

Posted at 9:54AM on Jun 5th 2009 by seclusivehawk

24. All the people calling this woman dirty names and giving this suit any kind of merit are idiots and the reason all these frivolous laws keep popping up. The wife is a woman vexed by her ex-husband and wants to hurt everything and everyone associated with him. His current girlfriend is a convenient revenge target. Plus, TMZ, it says child AND SPOUSAL SUPPORT". Why doesn't the lazy bitch go get a job. I love these women who spend all day lounging around with maids and butlers doing all the real wife work. They go to the beauty parlors, country clubs, day spas, and fitness clubs all day and talk about the "little people" (The same "little people" idiots in here defending her rich stuck-up ass), and then when reality smacks the spit out of their mouth, they act like they can't survive without their rich sugar daddy to support their pampered lifestyle anymore because they have a life threatening allergic reaction to WORK or GETTING A JOB. That being said, the husband is a worthless POS ONLY if he did allow his kids to be deprived just to woo some tail. The innocents are the kids and Ms. Ljungqvist. It's not her job to audit where her boyfriend's money comes from. I doubt they got together in a dark room at a secret location to hatch a sinister plan to deliberately cheat the kids out of money. Nope, he just bought gifts he shouldn't have, and avoided his responsibilities in the process. I'm willing to bet at least half of TMZ readership falls into that same category.

Those kids deserve a better set of parents, both mother and father. Sounds like both of them are jerks.

Posted at 10:28AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Please People...

25. This has nothing to do with the Playmate. The husband spent his money on her. If someone buys you a gift, do you check out their finances to see if it is correct for you to accept it.

Yes, she is a money hungry whooooerrr but that in itself is not cause for her to give back the gifts. I doubt the judge even allows this to go forward.

Posted at 10:42AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Ken

26. you say her chest measurements are a 32? is that a moon measurement, 'cos no way are those huge plastic basketballs a 32!

Posted at 10:55AM on Jun 5th 2009 by jt

27. The ex-wife is just trying to embarass her, it is not her ( the Playmate)fault her lousy ex-husband doesn't want to take care of his children.

Posted at 11:06AM on Jun 5th 2009 by TiredofThisCrap

28. as long as it wasn't their virginity, she should be fine..

Posted at 11:30AM on Jun 5th 2009 by Beard freak

29. With hooters like that, I would spend my mortgage money, car payment money, etc.... just for a little time with that bimbo!!

Posted at 8:52AM on Jun 6th 2009 by Jimbo

30. I don't see how she has any role in this. The father used child support money to buy gifts for a sexy young woman. He needs to be put under the jail. But all she did was be a bimbo. That's not actionable civilly or criminally.

Posted at 1:12PM on Jun 5th 2009 by fleiter

Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments