Real Housewives of Atlanta star Porsha Williams’ estranged husband, Simon Guobadia, asked a judge to reconsider the decision to allow her to film the reality show inside his home amid their bitter divorce war, In Touch can exclusively report.
According to court documents obtained by In Touch, Simon pleaded with the judge presiding over their divorce to vacate the November 19 order which permitted Porsha, 43, to film RHOA inside the Georgia mansion they once shared.
Simon purchased the $7 million mansion, but Porsha demanded she be allowed she have temporary exclusive use of the home after she filed for divorce in March.
Porsha claimed the prenup they signed before getting hitched had a provision that provided her the home following a split. Simon opposed the request claiming Porsha had her own home nearby and she should move into it instead.
In May, the judge sided with Porsha and awarded her the temporary exclusive use that she requested. Simon said at the time the court decided not to rule on the issue of filming inside the house.
He quoted the court order as stating, “Therefore, there should be no reliance on the Court for enforcement of either party’s position regarding the same until after such time as the issue has been heard.”
A couple of months later, in November, the court granted Porsha’s request to film Real Housewives of Atlanta at the property.
The order read, “That Wife’s temporary sole, and exclusive possession, use, and occupancy of the Marital Residence, includes Wife’s unrestricted right to film and produce television, film or social media or other audiovisual content in and around the Marital Residence.”
The judge continued, “If necessary, Husband shall execute any and all documents necessary to facilitate Wife’s ability to film and Husband’s release to film, returning any documents received within forty-eight (48) hours. All other issues are reserved for further determination.”
In his new motion to vacate the order permitting Porsha to film RHOA in his house, Simon claimed the court had contradicted itself in the two orders issued.
Simon said in March the court said the issue of filming would be heard before a judge, but he said the November order allowing filming was issued without a hearing where evidence was presented.
His lawyer argued, “[Simon] files this Motion to Vacate Order on Filming in Marital Residence and seeks to have this Court vacate its November 19, 2024 Order because the Court failed to conduct a hearing as it previously indicated it would on the issue, the Court did not receive any evidence to support its ruling, and equity demands that this Court vacates the Order.”
In his motion, Simon said Porsha claimed she needed the home for her employment with RHOA. The businessman said that despite her claims she has yet to produce any documents related to her employment, the terms of her employment or her salary.
His lawyer argued, “On one hand [Porsha] wants to use her employment to obtain relief from the Court, but on the other hand she wants to use the Court to avoid providing documentation of her employment to [Simon] to prevent him from preparing a defense against [Porsha’s] claims. Furthermore, [Porsha] has been selective about what provisions of the prenuptial agreement she wants this Court to enforce for her benefit and what provisions of the prenuptial agreement she wants this Court to ignore when doing so benefits her.”
Porsha has yet to respond in court. The judge has yet to rule.
