It’s been over a year since Colton Haynes filed for divorce from florist Jeff Leatham, and the couple has now finalized the split.
The Arrow and American Horror Story actor cited irreconcilable differences in divorce papers six months after marrying Leatham. Sometime after, friend of the couple Gus Kenworthy told reporters they were “working on things.”
Three months later it was reported the divorce was back on, and this week People shared details of the finalized divorce filing.
People reports the couple waived spousal support and each signed a non-disclosure and confidentiality agreement. The magazine even shared the language of that agreement, in case anyone’s interested in how celebrity divorce is practiced:
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
“Neither Party shall discuss‚ publish or post, or cause to be discussed published or posted, directly or indirectly, any private information pertaining to the other Party, the Parties’ relationship, or this dissolution action on any media, including without Iimitation, the internet (including, but not Iimited to, social media applications, Websites, blogs, news periodicals, etc.) or in other media in any manner,” the documents state.
“Neither Party shall authorize, Iicense or create (in whole or in part) a book, article, movie, or television production based upon, or which includes a character based upon, the other Party without the written consent of the other Party, or use the other Party’s name for any publicity related purpose.”
And if you, like us, are left wondering, “Yes but who is getting which car?!”, People even went so far as to share those invaluable plot points.
Josh447
Lovin the platinum hair on sexy boy Colton. I remember when I first saw him debut his evil self on Teen Wolf. I went full on zombie for him. He just gets better looking.
PollyDarton
I really thought this marriage would last longer than six months.
G R
WHO cares??
ryanM
Silly legalese. Nothing prevents them from talking about the divorce privately to a friend who can then go to the media, e.g. post on Facebook. No divorce agreement can limit the speech of any party outside of the relationship, unless that party is also signatory to the agreement. In other words, mucho information is to come.
As for spousal support and alimony, I can’t believe that’s still a thing in the 21st century. You hear these stories of celebrity wives (yes, they’re usually wives) getting millions in a divorce when they contributed nothing to the earning of that money. They spent their marriage being socialites, doing little to no traditional housework, etc. In othat words, they contribute little to the family structure other than sex and companionship. So why should they get a parting gift when sex and companionship are no longer offered? In fact, a divorce usually means that they are a source of acrimony. And yet the wealthier party is forced to pay the person causing all this stress? As a feminist, I’m disappointed that other feminists don’t speak out against this outdated and [overwhelmingly] sexist practice. And I’d say the same regardless of their gender or sexual orientation.
Brian
Did you miss this part?
“Neither Party shall discuss‚ publish or post, or cause to be discussed published or posted, directly or indirectly, any private information pertaining to the other Party,”
So yeah, they are prevented from talking about it with their friends, to an extent. Doesn’t mean they’ll abide by it though. But if any of it makes it’s way into the media through that friend, it won’t be the friend who violated the agreement, it will be Colton or Jeff for taking about it in the first place.
And based on what we’ve seen so far, it would be Colton, not Jeff.
Vince
That’s very prudent of him. I would be doing the same thing with this attention whore.
RyanMBecker
Brian, read the rest of the statement. All those limitations apply to “on any media.” Talking on the phone and talking over lunch with a friend is not using any media. Neither is writing a letter. Indeed, even private email is not considered media. It is referring to social media, and neither email nor a phone call would qualify.
As for causing such information to leak, either directly or indirectly, you’d have a hard time convincing me that a “cause” is synonymous with “source.” “Cause” is active, while a “source” is passive. Consider the case of you confiding to someone while swearing him to secrecy. But then he tells someone else. Are you a cause even though you swore him to secrecy?
There is simply no way any agreement can limit private speech since such speech is often targeted at a priest, therapist or the police. Can you imagine a society where you’d need written permission before discussing something with a healthcare provider or the police?
Brian
“or cause to be discussed published or posted, directly or indirectly, any private information pertaining to the other Party, the Parties’ relationship, or this dissolution action on any media”
If they talk to a friend on the phone about their relationship, and that friend posts it online, they have indirectly caused the information to be available online. If they’re talking about it over lunch and someone overhears then and publishes it, they have also indirectly caused the information to be available online. Sorry, you didn’t deliver a loophole here.
avesraggiana
Who are these guys again, and why do they merit my attention?
balttymore
So the divorce process lasted longer then their whole relationship….How messy must these 2 have to be to get married so quick
batesmotel
Kind of embarrassing that they only lasted six months. Typical same sex relationship. That’s historical in this case. The other issue is Colton comes out, then immediately announces this guy as his boyfriend, then gets married. He got overly excited to be out and married the first one he drooled over that drooled back. It’s like school teen girl behavior. But I do like Colton, he just needs to mature in a love relationship before getting married. They basically just dated was all. Wasn’t long enough to be considered a real relationship.
RyanMBecker
It’s only embarrassing if one sees a shark at communion. Otherwise, palatial differentiation exacerbates an otherwise mundane, yet terse rendition. As such, i would propose a diaspora — tangential to which you have already codified.
sfhairy
thank god we won’t have to pretend to be interested in a book.
MacAdvisor
I think the real question is what is his costume going to be for Halloween this year? He has had some spectacular costumes.
Josh447
Zactly! I was waiting for someone to bring up the important stuff! Looking forward to it.
mz.sam
Yep, for sure this is an American Horror Relationship story.