The estranged spouse of an aged financier griped in Manhattan courtroom Tuesday that he gave her a measly allowance of $10,000 a month — then slashed it in half when she requested him to start out his property planning.
Stephanie Foster, 57, added that hubby John H. Foster — an 82-year-old private-equity bigshot now claiming dire monetary straits of their multiyear divorce continuing — ultimately dwindled her allowance to nothing, forcing her to submit expense stories to his administration firm to get reimbursed.
She complained on the stand that even his preliminary hefty month-to-month payout to her “was lower than what I used to be making on fee,” referring to what she raked in as an funding banker at Deutsche Financial institution earlier than giving up her profession six months after marrying Foster in 2009.
Stephanie claims that her husband — who made his fortune within the medical-device world as managing companion of the $800 million non-public fairness agency HealthPointCapital — minimize her allowance in half about 5 years in the past, when she requested for a “modicum” of property planning.
He then eradicated it altogether and made her submit detailed expense stories to his household administration firm as a way to be reimbursed, she stated.
Her testimony was an effort to supply a rebuttal to her husband’s claims that, due to her profligate spending on garments and different objects, he now has a web value his legal professionals have described “barely a optimistic web value, if in any respect.”
“My husband is accusing me of spending down his whole $45 million web value,” plus the tens of hundreds of thousands extra he earned throughout their 15-year marriage, “which implies I used to be spending $1.5 million a month on myself, on garments,” she stated.
Stephanie has famous that whereas her husband was crying poverty, he nonetheless was jetting forwards and backwards from Florida to New York Metropolis for Botox, hair-dyeing and nail care appointments.
She stated she solely had entry to her private Chase Financial institution checking account throughout their marriage.
Shortly earlier than the pair wed in 2009, Stephanie stated, she was introduced with a pre-nup — which she declined to signal, since it will have left her “with nothing.”
She claimed it included a steadiness sheet exhibiting John had a web value of $80 million — and she or he had no motive to doubt it.
“Why would I?” she stated on the stand. “We have been courting for a 12 months, he had a really massive way of life, he had a Gulfstream jet, he had a private-equity agency, an enormous ranch in Texas, a really good home on Fishers Island [in New York], and he had been concerned on Wall Avenue for 50 years, so no, I’d don’t have any motive to not consider him.”
“Aside from the truth that I used to be going to be his third spouse,” she added. “However that wasn’t a priority.”
Stephanie pegged her husband’s bills associated simply to the properties he owned and rented in Manhattan, Fishers Island and Palm Seaside — plus a sprawling Texas looking ranch stuffed with unique, imported African animals — at $3.4 million yearly.
She claimed that when she as soon as requested him about life insurance coverage, he informed her he was “too costly to insure” and that retirement accounts have been for “suckers.”
In the meantime, her husband’s workforce stated it’s wanting into doable criminality round her supplying a photograph she snapped of a textual content message dialog on her husband’s telephone, which exhibits him celebrating a “net-worth technique” that left Stephanie with the impression that he was bankrupt.
Within the message, Foster thanks a household lawyer, stating “Your net-worth technique labored. Steph is shocked,” including that his spouse believes him to be “bankrupt.”
His legal professionals Tuesday accused Stephanie of improperly accessing his telephone and of violating her husband’s privateness and attorney-client privilege.
“Mr. Foster didn’t consent to Mrs. Foster accessing his non-public communications,” stated John’s lawyer, Linda Rosenthal, in courtroom.
In doing so, she could have simply confirmed the authenticity of not simply the textual content message but additionally of the “net-worth technique” as a authorized maneuver, which may increase moral considerations about John’s net-worth statements given underneath oath, stated Stephanie’s lawyer, BriAnne Copp.
The implications of the message’s content material didn’t escape Decide Ta-Tanisha James.
“If that’s certainly authenticated, and if the substance thereof is correct, there’s a sign that there was a misdirection … as to Mr. Foster’s assertion of web value and moreover, implicit in which can be points as as to if or not there have been some kind of moral violations,” James stated.
After the listening to, the Fosters sat within the hallway outdoors courtroom ready for his or her legal professionals — Stephanie scrolling by means of her telephone and John yards away, apparently deep in thought staring into area.