TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

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

Kelly Rutherford

DEVASTATED

By Custody Ruling

8/28/2012 5:06 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF
EXCLUSIVE

0828_kelly_rutherford_custody_article_tmz_2"Gossip Girl" star Kelly Rutherford just suffered an enormous loss in family court ... a judge just ruled her ex-husband can keep their 2 kids in France, where he is living ... and sources say shes "devastated."

Kelly was fighting to bring her kids back to the U.S.  Her ex, Daniel Giersch, lives in France and can't come back to the U.S. because his visa has been revoked.

The judge ruled Kelly has a flexible schedule and can go back and forth to France to spend time with her kids.  The court gave Kelly the right to have the children -- ages 5 and 3  -- 50% of the time.

But Kelly doesn't see it that way.  Sources tell us she believes it's virtually impossible now for her to spend meaningful time with the kids, given the enormous travel commitments that would be involved.

We're told Kelly plans to appeal the ruling.

162 COMMENTS

No Avatar
16.

R. Cortez    

Wow, this sucks. They should of tried harder to work it out. I know so many divorced people with kids who fully regret getting divorced at all. Typically when couples with young kids get divorced, it all just gets harder for everyone. Some divorces have to happen(see Katie Holmes), but you better be as sure as you were when you married them.

732 days ago
17.

WTF    

I agree with Anon #5. His visa was revoked for a reason. If his visa was revoked it means the is a persona non grata in this country, then comes a US JUDGE and says the kids should stay with this persona non grata? WTF????

So he gets awarded for having a revoked visa? These judges astonish me every day.

732 days ago
18.

DaveT    

If he keeps custody in France, she has full opportunity to see and keep kids 50% of the time.
If she gets new ruling and keeps kids in U.S., he does not have full opportunity to visit or pick up his kids, it will depend entirely on her.
Bottom line: She's appealing so she can gain full control and keep the kids away from their dad.

732 days ago
19.

Barbara    

She started this in the begining by making it very hard to see the kids...this is just karma on her :-)

732 days ago
20.

Barkingboy    

I know her from the Carnegie hill area of NYC....she is truly a nasty and horrible person....I bet her husband was thrilled to have to move back to France without her!!!!! It does suck for the kids, but I think they will grow up to be nicer people not being around her......

732 days ago
21.

A    

What is the huge deal? She is a friggin celebrity! I am glad that judge said what all celebs need to hear - "you can do it." I love Khloe Kardashian, but she always complained about being away from her family...when she was in Dallas....uhh, you have millions. Get a private jet. Fly there. Be done. See your kids - USE what you can.
And it is FRANCE, one of the most beautiful places to be. Not the back alley in a frozen part of Alaska.

732 days ago
22.

CriticXtreme    

Real dudes never want to take weights away for their mother. When it's done like this, it's for spite. Plus, I know a couple of people leaving for France because of 12.21.2012 and of course all the racism in the United States.

732 days ago
23.

romba    

Get on a plane, you bitch.

732 days ago
24.

Rae    

These children are American children. Their father knows his children are American. Since when is it appropriate to tell an American that her American children cannot live in America? Their father should have made sure not to lose his right to enter America.

732 days ago
25.

Seriously    

Seriously...what is wrong with you people. You scream and yell in your comments about Halle Berry, Tameka Raymond and now Kelly Rutherford. You scream and yell that it serves them right to lose their children. You yell that this is justice because mother's are learning how father's have felt and about father's rights blah blah blah. Grow up. This is about CHILDREN'S RIGHTS! Not the mother's rights or the father's rights. The child's rights. What is in the best interest of the child. Young children should not be ripped away from the mother unless the mother's are unfit and the children are in danger period. Father's should have rights and time with their children but it serves the children NO GOOD to be taken from their mother. If somebody goes to France while they have 50/50 agt in America and can't get back then return the children to America. There is a court order here. Most importantly, there is a reason these women give birth not the men. The children need their mother period. No amount of father's rights garbage will change that fact. These are all very sad decisions and the courts are setting devastating rulings for the children.

732 days ago
26.

writenow    

732 days ago
27.

cass    

Another win for the Men!

732 days ago
28.

Alice    

Why does he have physical custody in the first place?

732 days ago
29.

christy    

Why is it that people always think the mother is the most fit parent to raise a child? I think fathers get a bad rap. Maybe she she consider moving there, this is the last season for her tv series.

732 days ago
30.

Southerngal    

None of us know the ins and outs of this case. The judge does. Judges are human, just like us, and they have to make life-altering decisions on a daily basis. I am sure they make mistakes from time to time. But they typically do the right things in hundreds of cases every year. We do not know why he cannot get back in the US, nor do we know why the judge sided with the dad, but that does not automatically mean the Judge is in the wrong. All I'm saying is, there is a reason why this Judge reached this particular decision. Probably not trying to stick it to all mothers or set a new standard for all fathers, just making a decision based on the facts presented in this particular case for the best overall well-being of the children.

732 days ago
Previous 15 Comments | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web