TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Mel Gibson Settles Divorce Case with Wife

6/28/2011 8:50 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF

Mel Gibson and soon-to-be ex-wife Robyn have settled their divorce case.

0628_mel_gibson_robyn_EX2

Robyn Gibson's lawyer, disso-queen Laura Wasser, appeared before the judge this morning and announced Mel and Robyn have reached full agreement on the terms of their divorce ... in particular, the property settlement.

The lawyers are drafting the final paperwork and the judgment is expected to be entered at the end of August, making the divorce official.


2860 COMMENTS

No Avatar
91.

Curious    

Majestik -
Fully agree Mrs. Robyn has a far better claim on what she and Mr. Mel built together. Miss Oksana was deluding herself to think she could grab any of that.

I'd love to see Mr. Mel get away from it all, too. But it's safe to say he has commitments - like Lucia - that keep him in LaLaLand. There's also the Viking movie that's in the works and that potential swashbuckler. Not to mention his court appointed therapy sessions.

1149 days ago
92.

some guy    

What does the Church have to say about all this?


Anyone know the Pope?

1149 days ago
93.

some guy    

So what does Lindsay eat for breakfast? I believed in balanced, nutritional meals. And the occasional sack of Doritos.

1149 days ago
94.

Curious    

Majestik -

Even if Miss Oksana knows about every trust Mr. Mel set up for Lucia, there's not a damn thing she can do about it. =D

All Miss Oksana is entitled to is child support. She can't touch any savings, college, or trust funds that have been set up for Lucia through a third party, she doesn't have the authorization.

She could try to break the trusts, I suppose. But that would make it obvious to everyone she's trying to steal from her daughter. I doubt any civil court judge is going allow that.

The best she can hope for is that Lucia will continue to support her after Lucia has reached her majority.

1149 days ago
95.

some guy    

i thought Mel should get a regular job. Like a Fireman or Construction Worker.

1149 days ago
96.

some guy    

sry: "I think Mel should..."


I think my English is starting to break down.

1149 days ago
97.

Bunny that earns scooby snacks!    

Lucia doesn't get Lucia's money now--so what difference in a decrease?

Maj: BITE your tongue! I want more Mel movies--he can't do that from a hole someplace! Bite IT! ;P

1149 days ago
98.

Ehécatl    

ohreally:

Just because Vatican II issued no dogma doesn´t mean it's not binding on Catholics. For example, celibacy isn´t a dogma but it's binding on priests. Furthermore, the do***ents of the council aren't ambiguous, unless the black-white language of some earlier council´s anathemas is the only language you are used to. Why would a council intentionally write ambiguous and confusing do***ents?

You must be Mel Gibson writing under a really bad pseudonym. Go back to your ultramontane isolation and stop spreading misinformation.

1149 days ago
99.

Curious    

Majestik -
LOL-ing at bovine splatter!
I had a happy daydream of Mr. Mel and Lucia in Fiji, enjoying the ranch before it's sold. Mrs. Robyn, the kids and grandkids stopping by for a leisurely visit. I think a month of that would do wonders for everyone.


David Jong -
I vote cable guy!

1149 days ago
100.

some guy    

@Lindsay


I'm kinda scared right now. The minute I wake up all I can do is check TMZ. I know I've lost some weight since I started doing this and I dunno if I can stop right now. I hope you get better soon.

1149 days ago
101.

Curious    

Bunny Butt -
Hiya . . . snicker snicker at name. =P

Good point about Lucia not seeing much of her money now.
Miss Oksana still has to pay off Attorney George.
That explains Target.

(Side note - I like Target, shop there myself. And really, a two year old doesn't need expensive designer stuff. But Mommy does have her own bills to pay and Lucia's money only goes so far.)

1149 days ago
102.

some guy    

If I saw Oksana at a strip bar I'd pay for a dance.

1149 days ago
103.

realist    

Curious and Maj,

Here's the Family Code Section applicable to the division of assets.

2552. (a) For the purpose of division of the community estate upon dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties, except as provided in subdivision (b), the court shall value the assets and liabilities as near as practicable to the time of trial.

(b) Upon 30 days' notice by the moving party to the other arty,
the court for good cause shown may value all or any portion of the assets and liabilities at a date after separation and before trial to accomplish an equal division of the community estate of the parties in an equitable manner.

2553. The court may make any orders the court considers necessary to carry out the purposes of this division.

This comes into play when the parties do not come to an agreement on their own.

Hope this helps.

1149 days ago
104.

Curious    

David Jong -
If you flased a big enough wad of high demonitions, you'd probably get your money's worth. And be told two months later there's a kid on the way.

1149 days ago
105.

ohreally    

Ehécatl 11 minutes ago
ohreally:

Just because Vatican II issued no dogma doesn´t mean it's not binding on Catholics. For example, celibacy isn´t a dogma but it's binding on priests. Furthermore, the do***ents of the council aren't ambiguous, unless the black-white language of some earlier council´s anathemas is the only language you are used to. Why would a council intentionally write ambiguous and confusing do***ents?

You must be Mel Gibson writing under a really bad pseudonym. Go back to your ultramontane isolation and stop spreading misinformation.
**********************************
Vat II was pastoral, meaning by that very name that it is NOT binding. It would have to be termed dogmatic for it to be binding. Re celibacy, comparing it to Vat II, that is like comparing apples to green beans. And, celibacy is not a teaching of the church, it is a church law, man made, which can be changed. Like eating meat on Fridays.
You are, I think, purposely confusing the issue.
The do***ents are indeed ambiguous, leaving them open to tinkering and experimentation. Your way of writing, your use of the word ultramontane implies that I am a mindless reactionary. Not so. I am a traditional Roman Cathlic who loves and reveres the teachings of the Church which were taught (and are still true, still part of the Deposit of the Faith) for over 1900 years. One little pastoral council which has pushed a liberal agenda is not going to derail me from my faith.

And THANK YOU for a good laugh. So ya think I am Mel??? That is a hoot!!! hehe

I AM NOT.

1149 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web