Kevin Costner and his estranged wife Christine are in a legal dispute over personal items amid their divorce battle.
A California Superior Court judge presiding the former couple’s court case granted the 68-year-old actor’s motion that would block Christine, 49, from removing certain items from their Santa Barbara, California, home, PEOPLE reported.
“Christine shall be permitted to remove her toiletries, clothing, handbags, and jewelry,” according to the Friday order signed by Judge Thomas Anderle. The former handbag designer is prohibited, however, from taking “any other items of property including, but not limited to, furniture, furnishings, appliances, and artwork.”
Costner’s legal team asked the court to “prevent [Christine] from removing [Kevin’s] separate property from his home, and to ensure an orderly process for the removal of her separate property (if any).”
Costner referenced the terms of the premarital agreement they signed before marrying in 2004 that there is “no community property.”
“[Christine’s] counsel has stated, in writing, that [Christine] ‘plans’ to remove many items which are not [her] separate property,” the documents stated.
“[Christine] refuses to sign a Stipulation that she will not do so unless and until there is a written agreement between the parties.”
However, Costner’s legal team asked Christine to list the personal items she wished to have, and say they received a “hopelessly vague and ambiguous” list in response.
“For instance, Petitioner lists ‘Plates and bowls/ silverware’ without specifying which plates, which bowls, and which silverware. She lists ‘Christine’s family heirlooms and/or gifts to her’ but does not specify which items she believes were gifted to her (as opposed to both parties or the children),” according to the document.
“She lists ‘Christine’s personal electronic’ but fails to specify what that means. Is a TV a ‘personal’ electronic? Is she referring to household computers? Which ones?” the document stated.
Christine’s attorneys filed a response later that day, saying there was “no emergency” and that their client “identified all of the items she plans to remove from the home via photos and written descriptions.”
They also objected to the claims from Kevin’s side that there is no community property: “Many of these items [in the home] were acquired during marriage and are presumptively community property.”
Despite Christine’s objection, Judge Anderle ruled in Kevin’s favor.
