Skip to content

DivorceYouTube Divorcee Loses in Court

July 22, 2008

The verdict is in – it is no shock that the Youtube videos of Tricia Walsh-Smith back fired.

I previously wrote about how Mrs. Walsh-Smith lashed out against her husband Philip J. Smith in the her now famous YouTube video.   In the video, Ms. Walsh-Smith discusses, her marriage, the unfairness of her pre-nup, her marital sex life and more.   At one point in the video, she even  called her husband’s office and spoke to his assistant about his stash of Viagra and porn.

In my post, I predicted that this attempt to humiliate her husband would not be helpful to her case.

I hate to say I told you so, but my pointed criticism of Ms. Walsh-Smith was predictive of the court’s decision.

In granting a divorce to her husband Philip J. Smith on the grounds of cruel and inhuman treatment, Justice Harold B. Beeler found that Tricia Walsh-Smith’s “exposure” of his private life caused him “enormous mental distress.”

As the New York Post put it:


Beeler blasted Walsh-Smith for her video stunt, which he called “a calculated and callous campaign to embarrass and humiliate her husband” and to pressure him into settling the case on more favorable terms than were stated in their prenuptial agreement.

The New York Law Journal quoted the decision:

 Given Ms. Walsh-Smith’s YouTube postings and “her exploitation thereof in the media circus” that ensued, “there is no doubt that her conduct, taken in its totality, has now so endangered the plaintiff’s physical or mental well-being as to render it unsafe or improper for him to cohabit with the defendant

The Judge found that the prenuptial agreement, signed three weeks before the couple’s 1999 wedding, was valid. Walsh-Smith must now leave their Park Avenue apartment within 30 days.

Now, the only question is will Walsh-Smith make a follow-up video about how the judge or her attorney wronged her.

The information contained in this website has been provided for general informational purposes only and DOES NOT constitute legal advice; there is no warranty on this information and it does not in any way constitute an attorney-client relationship. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. All individuals are encouraged to seek independent counsel for advice regarding their specific situation and facts. 


Further, e-mails or other correspondence with any member of this firm does not create an attorney-client relationship without the explicit written agreement between the parties

Call Now Button