Skip to main content

Kelis Claims Nas Has Left Her Completely Broke

Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 2:15 pm
By: EURweb.com




Divorce papers obtained by TMZ.com reveal just how ugly the situation is between Nas and Kelis.

The singer, who is pregnant with their first child and due this month, says she doesn't have two nickels to rub together because Nas has cut her off financially. She is asking the judge to order Nas to pay spousal support, child support, all pregnancy-related expenses and one-half of all medical expenses after the child is born.

She also seeks $3,500 for the baby nurse after the child's birth, and $20,000 for strollers, cribs and other baby supplies.

"My survival is based on his will at this time," said Kelis. "If he does not want to pay for an expense, it does not get paid."

Kelis says she's entitled to maintain the lifestyle to which she became accustomed during their six-year marriage -- they have five homes, fly first class, go to fancy restaurants, and on and on.

"There were many expensive pieces [of jewelry] such as a princess-cut diamond tennis bracelet that was recently appraised for $190,000. My engagement ring is an approximately nine-carat cushion-cut diamond solitaire. I have numerous watches...such as Cartier, Rolex, Frank Muller and Chopard."

Her lawyer, Laura Wasser, says in a separate declaration she's asked Nas to contribute money for Kelis and the unborn baby but he hasn't responded.



---------------------------------------------------


Kelis' Monthly Expenses? Nearly $81,000, She Says

Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009, 2:25 pm
By: EURweb.com


Singer Kelis has just submitted her financial information to the court, reports TMZ, in an attempt to get support and baby expenses from estranged husband Nas.

Kelis says from Nov. 2008 to April 2009, her average monthly income was $21,616. She's far from struggling, but the amount is a drastic reduction from what she and Nas were earning while they were together.

The R&B star, whose first baby with Nas is due this month, has some pretty hefty expenses -- $80,831 a month ... way more than she says she makes. The "Milkshake" singer says she hasn't toured in a year and most of her income comes from her concerts.

The artist says she spends $14,861 on her mortgage. Her nanny costs $3,500 a month. She spends $15,000 a month on entertainment, gifts and vacations, and she says it cost $175 to have the "baby rug dry cleaned."
Nas Ordered to Pay Kelis $40K a Month in Support

Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 2:00 pm
By: Anthony McCartney, AP Entertainment Writer




LOS ANGELES (AP) — A judge has ordered Nas to pay Kelis nearly $40,000 in monthly support for the near future, a day after the "Milkshake" singer gave birth to the divorcing couple's baby boy.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Louis Meisinger issued the order at a Thursday hearing. Neither Nas, whose full name is Nasir Jones, nor Kelis, whose full name is Kelis Rogers, attended Thursday's hearing.

Rogers will receive $30,471 in spousal support per month; the couple's son will receive $9,027, according to the court records.

Rogers gave birth to the boy, named Knight, at a New York hospital Wednesday. The 29-year-old filed for divorce from the rapper in April. The couple was married in July 2003.

The two have been sparring over support payments for several months, with Rogers contending that Jones hasn't paid many of the costs of her pregnancy and her expenses. His attorney, Mark Vincent Kaplan, told the judge that the rapper has paid $30,000 in expenses and the former couple's health insurance has been maintained.

A hearing on whether the payments should be altered will be heard on Sept. 8.

Kaplan proposed paying Rogers a one-time payment of $20,000 until the judge could settle on an appropriate spousal and child support amount at a later hearing.

Meisinger rejected that offer, saying more money per month would be needed to accommodate Rogers' lifestyle and was warranted based on income declarations filed with the court.

Meisinger told Rogers' attorney, Laura Wasser, that the singer has 30 days to decide whether to return to the couple's Los Angeles home. Jones is paying to maintain the property in the meantime.

The judge also ordered Jones to pay $45,000 to pay Rogers' attorney fees and for a forensic accountant.

Wasser said Kelis is trying to secure a new record deal and hopes to begin recording new music soon. She said Rogers' income has dipped in recent months.

She went into labor on Monday, and delivered Knight Jones on Wednesday evening around 9 p.m., according to Rogers' publicist, Tracy Nguyen. The baby weighed 7 pounds, 8 ounces.

Kaplan said Jones arrived at the hospital about five minutes before his son was born. Nguyen said Rogers' mother and sister were in the hospital room for the birth.
Family court is about economic equity, primarily for the child(ren), not about exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain.

I don't know their business, but if she's talking about hiring a nanny (which suggests not being an active parent), does it matter who has custody outside of leverage for future financial support? Wonder if they got married in a support equal shares state? 19

I'm not sure why she would qualify for alimony. I don't recall Kelis quitting the record business after getting married. Confused At least he'll be able to write the alimony off on his taxes.

This is where family law needs to be tightened IMO. It shouldn't be hard to require the establishment of a trust for support payments and have a trustee administer the funds for the reasonable needs of the child(ren) and custodial parent and request adjustments of the court as truly needed.
What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her? The bulk of the money 30 thousand was alimony.. 9 thousand was in child support.. the couple used to live off of 80 thousand from his paycheck alone.. He was slapped because he broke the marital contract... especially while she was pregnant.. and she receives what she would have gotten had he not abused and abandoned her.. :-/ Public sentiment is skewed because there is serious disparity in living between the rich and the poor.. 40 thousand is not a lot for a man who will be single living off of the other 40 thousand.. It just freaks we who are not making near that out.. and of course those that hate women.. this really gets their goat.. In their minds a millionaire should be able to abuse, cheat on and abandon his wife and then throw her a few bucks to take care of the children when she gets pissed..

update: Nas makes 141 thousand a month.. and admits to spending 71 thousand a month on himself...strictly for clothing and personal grooming.. etc..
There's no hate of any gender, just commentary on family law. It's an old school line of thought to punish the defendant in a divorce case. Children deserve all the support their parents can afford. Adults with careers that neither has set aside should not be privy to the spoils of their partner (alimony) that they had no part in creating. Split the real marital assets and keep it moving. Nas was a recording star, before anyone had ever heard of Kelis. She didn't contribute to his career success (even with the handful of records they recorded together) The spending by mother and father is silly and frivolous. I'd have no problem with 30 going to the child and 9 (temporarily) going to Kelis.
There is a lack of empathy gene in men that hate women.. which doesn't allow them to understand "life accustomed to"..

If the McNair situation was indeed a suicide.. then we can see the very real effects of how placing someone in a lifestyle and then dropping them can affect someone.. clearly murder is psychopathic and not held here as an ideal.. it is just cited to explain the reality of how a severe change in lifestyle can be cruel if you can do something to avoid it.. It is why scientists warn us of depression when we move, divorce or someone dies.. lifestyle changes where you go from 80 thousand a month to less than 20 thousand a month is the equivalent among the rich to going from 80 thou a year to 20 thou a year..

Now when someone has agreed to support you and work together and you are living this way and then that person abuses you and then abandons you and essentially threatens your way of life, health and future... then that person has forfeited the contract...

this has to do with what parties agreed and the consequences of abandoning that contract.. and the effects it has on the lives of the wife and child...

Not whether the wife has earned the money... but whether the husband has agreed to keep the wife in a certain lifestyle.. the court awarded the money based off of that..

Historically men have used their money to control women within a relationship.. and when he gets tired of her he dumps her.. well this can be done outside of marriage (see crazy ex syndrome from McNair) but when done in marriage the man can not get away with it...

Add to this a child and you have egregious behavior on his part..

Even if 30 thousand goes to child support.. his wife will be in charge of that money... she will have to place a roof over their head comparable to what it would be if the child's dad was in their lives.. and maintain the child's life in that way... she will still be in charge of how the money is spent..

When you look at a woman as a MAN with a uterus you completely miss the point... of the dynamics of female/male relationships , their history and the consequences of European styled male domination and its effects on women...

but that's too deep for most right now.. just stick with he broke a contract ..... try to wrap your head around that...

I think it is terrible to care for a woman for years... off your salary.. commit to her and promise fidelity.. then abuse, cheat on and abandon her then throw her a few bucks for the child and tell her to get a job.. :-/


RE: Their lifestyle.. it's beyond silly Nas in particular needs money management and discipline training... since he decided it would be his money that the family would rely on...

also Nas got caught on tape cheating.. so that was the end of that...
quote:
What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her?


That's a rhetorical question, right? But completely ignoring what DD correctly stated:

quote:
Family court is about economic equity, primarily for the child(ren), not about exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain.


The question should be "What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her? Leave the children out of it because there is nothing to suggest that they witnessed any of the abuse or infidelity.

If he abused her, sue him in civil [not family] court. If he was unfaithful, sue him in civil [not family] court.
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
quote:
What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her?


That's a rhetorical question, right? But completely ignoring what DD correctly stated:


No.. But you know that.. you just don't want to directly answer the question...

quote:


quote:
Family court is about economic equity, primarily for the child(ren), not about exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain.


The question should be "What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her? Leave the children out of it because there is nothing to suggest that they witnessed any of the abuse or infidelity.

If he abused her, sue him in civil [not family] court. If he was unfaithful, sue him in civil [not family] court.

So your issue is not whether she should be compensated for the breaking of the marriage contract through abuse and infidelity.. but that the wrong court decided? Because I like the American system that has separated juvenile, family and other courts recognizing the unique situation of each.. The family court already separates her marital issue from his responsibility to the children.. hence alimony v. child support... that she received..

If Nas filed and won a counterclaim against Kelis for any adultery on her part she would not get a dime in alimony... so I think the court's are fair.. I think men really hate it when they are held accountable.. and there is no bickering when women who are the breadwinners of the family are required to pay alimony to their ex spouses.. Halle Berry included.. just outrage when women who are often with child are awarded it. interesting...
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
quote:
What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her?


That's a rhetorical question, right? But completely ignoring what DD correctly stated:

quote:
Family court is about economic equity, primarily for the child(ren), not about exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain.


The question should be "What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her? Leave the children out of it because there is nothing to suggest that they witnessed any of the abuse or infidelity.

If he abused her, sue him in civil [not family] court. If he was unfaithful, sue him in civil [not family] court.



It has not been established that Kelis is "exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain." The filter of gender and past experience may lead some to interpret it that way.

also there is no way to "leave the children" out of a broken marriage regardless of whether they eyeballed the specific acts of betrayal. Children are sensitive and they know when parents are angry with each other, avoiding each other, and not making those funny noises that they used to make at night. As much as one may want to compartmentalize it's not possible to leave the children out of it.

What would be the point of taking a family court matter to civil court? That makes no sense whatsoever. Confused A dude would be lucky to avoid criminal court in matters of abuse. FAmily court is for family issues and the correct venue to sort out the details surrounding the dissolution of a family.
Let me try again...

Historically, women were not able (due to cultural bias and discrimination) to earn salaries that allowed them to take care of themselves and their children. Marriage was a form of income security. Alimony (adult support) along with child support was often a necessary legal measure to maintain income security. Society always views men as being able to secure income; this is why few men receive alimony in divorce settlements. Today, women have acheived relative parity in income earning potential. As such, the need to insure economic stability via alimony is not mandatory in many divorces. In this particular case, both parties earn substantial amounts of money, which will allow each to live well without assistance from the other party. Alimony in this case would only be punitive IMO.

The newborn child is their first, there has been no opportunity ex vitro for the child to witness any alleged abuse/infidelity (again, I don't follow celeb gossip, so I don't know whether the allegations are true).

I believe family courts should assign a trustee, or at minimum an auditor, to review the use of child support funds by the custodial parent (note my gender-free descriptor - stop trying to paint this as woman bashing) to insure that the best interest of the child(ren) is maintained first.

Again, family court is about taking care (financially) of the kids. The divorce is about ending an unhappy/unhealthy marriage.
Kelis long considered and alternative hiphop/rap artist, has not been as successful as Nas and undoubtedly her earning capacity has not been anywhere near his. In fact, she was dropped from her record company. People shouldn't make assumptions and count her money for her.

In a general sense black men still out-earn black women per capita.

Roll Eyes @ the head of of the family and all that entails...
About 18 months ago (maybe a little longer), I showed you a study that found the income of black men and women intersecting (with the women's figure rising and men's decreasing). That's why I said relative parity.

In this case, I don't care if one earns multiple times what the other earns since both sets of earnings are excessive. Recording artists make the bulk of their money from touring, not record sales, so being dropped from a label doesn't mean she can't make money. Child support is tax free for the custodial parent. That's why I said the child should get the 30K/month, or even the whole 40K. ~$500,000 every year tax free can buy you a 8-10,000 sq. ft home, a luxury car, private school, insurance, utilities, groceries, vacations, money to invest, etc. This would put the custodial parent and child in better circumstances than 90+ percent of the world's population. Even if her career is dead, Khalliqa is arguing that not jet-setting (via alimony payments) will cause damage to Kelis in some way. Don't buy that line of thought or that divorce mandates alimony (adult support).

I'm not touching all the cultural notions (head of family, etc) you are putting in because that becomes a completely different discussion along the lines of:

Why do family courts make it so difficult for men to become custodial parents?

Why do family courts refuse to make custodial parents account for their use of child support?

Why do states promote introducing non-custodial parents (primarily men) into the legal system by allowing excessive support hearings to be filed?

Is family court meant to resolve the issues between adults that lead to the divorce?

Do today's men and women believe in and follow historical cultural standards & practices (head of household, etc.)?
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
Khalliqa is arguing that not jet-setting (via alimony payments) will cause damage to Kelis in some way. Don't buy that line of thought or that divorce mandates alimony (adult support).


No.. not me.. the court has decided (and I agree) that alimony payments, in this situation, correct the disruption and damage caused by the breaking of support in an agreed upon dependent lifestyle ... The court essentially says you can't keep someone in a certain lifestyle then abandon them arbitrarily.. and if you do you must maintain the conditions under the agreement... when children are concerned this is even more of an important point...

And alimony is not automatic you have to PROVE abandonment of the marital vows (contract) and if Kelis were the one to break the vows she would get NOTHING...

Again.. woman haters have NOTHING to say when Britney Spears or Halle Berry have to pay palimony.. only when women receive it.. smh..

Your argument is that a man can care for a woman and then decide he can mistreat her and leave her because she can find a good job later..

---------------------------

From Divorcesupport.com


http://www.divorcesupport.com/...husband-to-1427.html


Is spousal support a payoff from the husband to the wife in order to get out of a marriage?

At one time, the purpose of alimony was to punish the husband for leaving his wife without a good cause. With the recent rise in no-fault divorce, this purpose of punishment became moot. As stated above, the main purpose of spousal support today is to maintain a certain standard of living for a divorced spouse who is not capable of attaining employment which would suffice in maintaining that standard living.
I do not believe in alimony or palimony (adult support - I was using alimony as a catch-all phrase - didn't think I would have to explain that) except in extreme circumstances. The loss of lifestyle argument does not resonate with me, particularly between millionaires.

Your site link says nothing that differs substantially with my opinion of spousal support (historically or current day). One millionaire doesn't need spousal support from another millionaire.

This is likely a temporary settlement issued by the court while the divorce proceedings take place, which means discovery, (aka proving anything) has likely not taken place.

My argument has always been - both parents should take care of any children resulting from their relationship to best of their abilities. No children - divide assets produced during marriage - no adult support payments. Child support (tax-free) can include housing & other expenses to facilitate child rearing, which also provides benefit to the custodial parent and can extend beyond age 18 in some cases. Alimony can be eliminated before a child is of legal age and can be taxed. A good tax attorney would tell any custodial parent to take child support instead of alimony.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
I do not believe in alimony or palimony (adult support - I was using alimony as a catch-all phrase - didn't think I would have to explain that) except in extreme circumstances.


It is mentioned because there is no outrage when it comes to women paying alimony ... no threads.. no mention of it.. and no one mentions it in balance... just male outrage over women who receive it... particularly women with children.. and especially when the MAN screwed her over..

btw: Janet Jackson had to pay her ex 15 million dollars a mercedes and a mansion and they had no children together.. no black male backlash for that one...

quote:
The loss of lifestyle argument does not resonate with me, particularly between millionaires.


I think it is fair especially because the court is not biased against rich people.. it does not say to rich people that they make too much money to be considered justly .... it simply states that if you've been cared for in a certain way the other party does not have the right to disown you and/or break the vow arbitrarily...

quote:

This is likely a temporary settlement issued by the court while the divorce proceedings take place, which means discovery, (aka proving anything) has likely not taken place.


True.. but he has filed no initial counterclaims that I know of...

quote:


A good tax attorney would tell any custodial parent to take child support instead of alimony.


I definitely agree that the 30 thou. should be made more secure through child support instead of alimony... however if she ever remarries the alimony stops... and since this is temporary we do not know if the alimony will be a rehabilitative type of alimony or not...
Last edited {1}
I understand your reasoning Khalliqa. I suppose it's a squeaky wheel phenomenon. Palimony doesn't happen very often to my knowledge, so it's not a subject that gets a lot of conversation. I don't follow celeb gossip, so I didn't know about Janet, Britney or Halle. If someone posts about palimony in the future, I promise you that I will speak out against it. 4 I think this is an agree to disagree topic for us.
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
I understand your reasoning Khalliqa. I suppose it's a squeaky wheel phenomenon. Palimony doesn't happen very often to my knowledge, so it's not a subject that gets a lot of conversation. I don't follow celeb gossip, so I didn't know about Janet, Britney or Halle. If someone posts about palimony in the future, I promise you that I will speak out against it. 4



Roll Eyes You've got selective outrage.. you only come on the board to be contrary.. and to diminish any discussion of women's rights.. so whatever D..

quote:
I think this is an agree to disagree topic for us.
We ALWAYS disagree because your dislike of women usually comes through in the position you take..
The last post was legit and the wink was meant to be light-hearted because I can disagree with you without being disagreeable.

I don't agree with some of your opinions. That does not equal dislike of you or dislike of women. It doesn't make me contrarian either. We just don't share a similiar worldview and that's OK. Not sure why you try to go "there" with me, especially when I'm engaging in earnest dialog. No worries.
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
The last post was legit and the wink was meant to be light-hearted because I can disagree with you without being disagreeable.

I don't agree with some of your opinions. That does not equal dislike of you or dislike of women. It doesn't make me contrarian either. We just don't share a similiar worldview and that's OK. Not sure why you try to go "there" with me, especially when I'm engaging in earnest dialog. No worries.


Roll Eyes *le sigh* How could I forget your tendency to spin... I should not have gone against my policy and answered you.. Every time I do I regret it.. sck

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×