Sep. 3 2023, Published 3:14 a.m. ET
Kenny G accused his ex-wife Lyndie Benson of hiring a team of lawyers to take him on in court 10 years after they hashed out a settlement — and the legendary musician has asked a judge to shut her requests down immediately, RadarOnline.com has learned.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, Kenny G [real name: Kenneth Gorelick] has disputed his ex’s claim he’s required to list the pad for sale per their divorce deal.
Article continues below advertisement
As we first reported, in June, Lyndie claimed Kenny had failed to follow the terms of their 2013 settlement. She said he agreed to pay her 25% of all proceeds from the sale of the home over $40 million.
Lyndie said Kenny has been profiting off the home [named Grayfox] by renting it to billionaire Jeff Bezos and his fiancée Lauren Sanchez.
Article continues below advertisement
Her motion read, “Until recently, Kenny concealed from Lyndie that he had vacated the home and leased it for $600,000 per month, all in effort to deprive Lyndie” of her right to the home being sold.
Lyndie demanded Kenny be ordered to put the home on the market immediately. She said the current value of the residence exceeds $40 million.
Article continues below advertisement
MORE ON:
Kenny G
The musician initially asked the court to postpone the matter until October, which is when Jeff’s lease ended.
Now, in newly filed documents, Kenny said he doesn’t have any obligation to put the home up for sale. He said the divorce agreement said he was required to pay his ex a portion of the sale proceeds if the home was sold for over $40 million.
Article continues below advertisement
He argued the deal never said when he had to list the home nor was any deadline given. Kenny said the home could be sold AFTER Lyndie’s death— and then the proceeds would be paid out to their children.
The musician said all the drama with his ex started in 2021 after he asked to reduce the $40k per month in spousal support he pays to Lyndie.
Article continues below advertisement
Kenny said he had turned 65 and was experiencing a decline in income. However, he said he withdrew the request after a “sudden and unexpected influx of income when he was presented with an offer to lease” the Malibu home.
“Kenny contends the language is clear as day – if there is ever a sale of Kenny’s Grayfox Property, Lyndie will receive monies from the sale of anything in excess of $40,000,000 less capital gain taxes and expenses. If there is not a sale in excess of $40 Million, Lyndie will not receive monies. There is no obligation set forth for Kenny to sell the Grayfox Property. There is no deadline by which a sale must occur. There is no condition as to how Kenny must value or list the Grayfox Property for sale. Absolutely no conditions are set forth – Kenny is awarded the Grayfox Property unconditionally as his sole and separate property,” his lawyer wrote.
Further, Kenny said his ex has fired off a subpoena to his business manager demanding information about Bezos’ lease.
His motion read “in further attempt to harass and bully Kenny, Lyndie, with now another law firm added to her legal team, has propounded discovery on matters that have no relevance to Lyndie’s claim that Kenny must sell the Grayfox Property nor likely to lead to admissible evidence. And, perhaps more importantly, she is seeking documents that are protected by a very prohibitive confidentiality clause between Kenny and a third-party.”
Kenny argued the documents Lyndie has demanded are “not relevant” to her “baseless” claims.
“These requested documents include not only Kenny’s private financial information which is no way at issue before the Court, but also the private financial information of third-parties,” his lawyer claimed. “Kenny and the third-party/tenant are parties to a very prohibitive confidentiality clause which provides the lease, its terms and conditions, are considered proprietary information, and may not be disclosed to any other person. It provides that Kenny and the third-party/tenant, and their agents, attorneys, employees, etc, shall not disclose the lease, its terms, the identity of the parties, or any information related thereto to any other person.”
The judge has yet to rule.