- Ivey’s former wife sought to remove presiding judge Bill Gonzalez from the case and reopen discovery in the divorce settlement proceedings.
- The petition was denied by the Nevada Supreme Court.
- Luciaetta Ivey alleged that campaign contributions made to the judge by Phil Ivey, his attorney, and the attorney hired by Phil Ivey to represent Luciaetta in their divorce were inappropriate and that she was denied a fair settlement.
A legal challenge by the former wife of famed poker player Phil Ivey regarding the terms of their 2009 divorce, seeking the removal of the presiding judge because of prior campaign contributions by Ivey and his attorneys, has been dismissed.
The Las Vegas Review Journal reported on Thursday that the petition brought by Luciaetta Ivey, which sought to remove presiding judge Bill Gonzalez from the case and reopen discovery in the divorce settlement proceedings, was denied by the Nevada Supreme Court.
Luciaetta Ivey sought the removal of Gonzalez and a reopening of the divorce proceedings after discovering that Gonzalez had received a combined total of $10,000 in campaign contributions from Phil Ivey, prominent Vegas attorney David Chesnoff (who represented Phil Ivey), Chesnoff’s wife, a second attorney in Chesnoff’s firm, and attorney John Spilotro, who Phil Ivey had hired to represent Luciaetta in the initial divorce proceedings.
According to the LVJR, the contributions in question represented 14% of the judge’s total campaign donations in 2010, the year the Ivey divorce decree was settled.
Luciaetta Ivey initially received a $180,000 monthly settlement from Phil, but that was dependent on the $940,000 monthly disbursement Phil received in turn from Full Tilt, where he was perhaps the site’s most recognized player-owner. Luciaetta’s monthly stipend ceased after Black Friday.
Luciaetta subsequently filed action against former husband Phil and attorneys Chesnoff and Spilotro, alleging “combination and conspiracy” by the attorneys, in conjunction with Phil Ivey, working together to deprive Luciaetta of her fair share of the couple’s worth. Luciaetta also claimed malpractice by Spilotro, asserting that he never made a serious attempt to determine the full nature of Phil Ivey’s net worth.
Ivey has obfuscated an asset at least once in the past, oddly enough registering his famed “INDIAN HEAD” account on UltimateBet, which dates to the pre-Full Tilt days, in Luciaetta’s name.