Taylor and Kelce’s Prenup? She Gets the Cats, He Gets the Cleats

You Belong With Me, But Not Without a Prenup

When news broke that Travis Kelce had popped the question to Taylor Swift, another somewhat less romantic question soon started spreading across the internet: What will their prenup look like?

Kelce, of course, is no pauper — the Kansas City Chiefs tight end has an estimated net worth of $70 million. But he is marrying the 2,331st richest person on earth, who commands $1.6 billion of her own. That, according to the lawyers Rambling Reporter consulted on the matter, makes this merger particularly tricky, at least from a financial point of view.

For starters, both parties will need to document every single penny they have — and all their debts, too — as they enter the marriage. That’s a tougher task for Swift, who likely has many revenue streams running her empire, replete with multiple subsidiaries within each of those. “I can’t imagine the amount of paperwork and the amount of professionals that are involved in [arranging] that,” says April Zonnis, a family law attorney and partner at Century City’s Summers Levine. “I’m doing a divorce now where the wife is a billionaire, and her disclosures are just beyond comprehension.”

Swift and Kelce also will need to decide what state’s jurisdiction their prenup will be in. New York is a frontrunner, as it distributes marital property equitably rather than 50-50, like California. However, “there doesn’t seem to be a huge benefit for either one of them creating a large marital estate because their estates are so large already,” explains Marc Garelick, managing partner of Garelick Family Law. “Though Travis may feel differently about that than Taylor does.”

And what about all those royalties Swift will continue to rake in from her vast premarital music catalog? Will they suddenly become marital property?

“No,” Zonnis assures Rambling. “Any income derived from your separate property continues to be your separate property.”

All too well in case of a future split: Taylor gets the cats, Travis keeps the cleats, and both parties will likely hold on to their own individual fortunes. David Geffen may want to take some notes. — OREN PELEG

Kanye’s Gutted Malibu Mansion Is Back on the Market (Plumbing Now Included)

There ought to be a word for what Kanye West did to that magnificent Tadao Ando-designed masterpiece on Malibu Road. Archi-cide? Reno-icide? Home-icide? Whatever you call it, the temple-like beachfront mansion that West purchased in 2021 for $57 million — and then proceeded to strip bare, removing windows, plumbing and electricity, leaving it an uninhabitable concrete shell, before selling it three years later for a mere $21 million — is back on the market. Asking price: $34.9 million.

Prospective buyers will be relieved to hear that some amenities have been restored to their original condition. Indeed, the real estate group that purchased it from West, Belwood Investments, sunk a reported $8.5 million into putting back plumbing and electricity for what they no doubt hoped would be the ultimate house flip. Earlier this year, it looked like Belwood had found a buyer, Montana-based developer Andrew Mazzella, who reportedly agreed to a cash purchase for something like $30 million. But this summer that deal unraveled, with both sides lobbing accusations of bad faith and questionable financing.

Despite its troubled history — and lofty price tag — some high-end property experts assure Rambling that the place eventually will find a buyer. “We were all quite shocked by what was done to this architectural masterpiece,” says Barron N. Hilton, co-founder of the luxury real estate firm Hilton Hilton (also Paris and Nicky’s brother). “But it’s Malibu. This stretch of the coastline is as coveted as it gets. It’ll eventually get sold.”

Everybody Gets a Subpoena! Blake Lively’s Lawyers Cast a Wide Net

At the risk of getting dragged into court, Rambling has to ask — what’s up with Blake Lively these days?

In July, the actress’ legal team fired off a fleet of subpoenas — many by email — to no less than 107 media personalities both big (like Perez Hilton, who is fighting his summons in court, and supposedly Megyn Kelly, who shot back that Lively was a “narcissistic bully,” despite Lively’s spokesperson denying Kelly was ever subpoenaed) and microscopic (like a 28-year-old single mom in Kansas with just one follower on YouTube). It’s all presumably part of Lively’s discovery process before heading into a civil trial in New York in March to try and prove her allegation that much of the negative press she’s been facing over the past year was part of a vast media smear campaign orchestrated by It Ends With Us director/co-star Justin Baldoni in retaliation for Lively’s harassment charges against him in December. But the scope and breadth of the subpoenas — which demand everything from text messages to bank statements to phone records — has a lot of folks scratching their heads, especially those unlucky enough to have been served one.

“I don’t check my email very often, so I didn’t know I’d been subpoenaed,” says Kassidy O’Connell, a YouTuber who offers her 19,000 subscribers her own folksy, non-lawyer-brand legal commentary on public cases, including the Lively-Baldoni scrap. “But I began to hear from other YouTubers about how they’d been subpoenaed, so I checked my email, and there it was.” Like many of her friends, O’Connell pushed back, filing a motion to quash, which was enough for Lively’s lawyers to withdraw their summons. “They were trying to intimidate us,” she says. “But that made me angry.” Indeed, since receiving the court notice, O’Connell has posted some 20 videos on the case, including one titled “Kassidy O’Connell Fights Back Against Bogus Subpoena.”

Hilton, meanwhile, is battling his subpoena in court in Las Vegas, where he lives, arguing that his reporting is protected by Nevada’s press shield laws. “Their argument is that I’m not really a journalist,” he tells THR, “which is ridiculous.” His theory as to what’s going on with Lively right now: “It’s about ego,” he says. “Lively can’t accept that people don’t like her, so she’s decided it has to be a conspiracy.”

This story appeared in the Sep. 3 issue of The Hollywood Reporter magazine. Click here to subscribe.