Julia Haart received a default divorce judgment in January 2025 that included business and financial awards. Contemporaneous coverage described her as receiving the couple’s 70 Vestry Street apartment, valued at $65 million, and nearly $10 million in cash. Those figures were reported by Us Weekly; the court’s later appellate opinion confirms the judgment and several awards but does not state those two amounts. In April 2026, the Appellate Division affirmed the divorce judgment while sending certain financial awards back for written findings.
What did Julia Haart receive in the January 2025 divorce order?
On January 17, 2025, New York Supreme Court entered an order striking Silvio Scaglia’s divorce complaint and granting Haart a default judgment of divorce on her answer and counterclaims. The order also included financial and business-related relief.
The New York Appellate Division’s 2026 opinion lists these components:
- $7.4 million in management fees for 2019 through 2021.
- A 50% interest in Freedom Holding, Inc. and its subsidiaries as of the commencement of the action, and a 50% interest in Elite World Group and SW Vestry, LLC.
- Half of the proceeds from the sale of a Kees Van Dongen painting owned by Freedom Holding.
- Half of company withdrawals the trial court deemed dissipation of marital property.
- Powers of attorney to carry out the orders and to intervene in a mortgage-foreclosure action concerning the marital residence.
- 90% of legal fees, with the amount to be determined after an inquest.
Us Weekly reported on January 21, 2025, that Haart was awarded the 70 Vestry Street apartment, described as worth $65 million, and nearly $10 million in cash. Those are contemporaneous press-reported figures, not dollar amounts stated in the appellate opinion. The opinion does not independently establish the apartment’s valuation or the cash figure. Us Weekly’s January 2025 report covered those reported terms.
#1 Best Overall
Was it a divorce settlement?
The available record describes a court order and a default judgment, not a negotiated settlement. The distinction matters: the reported home and cash terms should not be presented as a private deal agreed by both spouses. The appellate court said Scaglia repeatedly violated court orders, including by failing or refusing to provide ordered discovery, pay court-ordered counsel fees and fees for a forensic expert and special masters, and attend conferences. It upheld the trial court’s decision to strike his pleadings and grant Haart a default judgment of divorce. The First Department’s April 2026 opinion sets out that procedural history and ruling.
What changed on appeal in April 2026?
The Appellate Division affirmed the default divorce judgment, but it did not leave every financial award untouched. It found the trial court had not supplied the factual basis and reasons needed for its awards of management fees, Freedom Holding ownership, and painting proceeds, and remanded those issues for written findings.
Rank #2
For the $7.4 million management-fee award, the appellate court said the record lacked the calculation or basis for the amount and directed that it be addressed at an inquest. It also ordered any management fees or painting proceeds Haart had already received to be placed in escrow pending the trial court’s written determination. The opinion therefore confirms the award in the 2025 order while making clear that its financial basis required further trial-court proceedings.
Was the 70 Vestry Street apartment later sold?
A 2026 LegalClarity summary reports that the penthouse was listed for $65 million in November 2025 and sold for $57 million in February 2026. That secondary report does not establish how sale proceeds were distributed, or whether a later court order addressed them. The reported sale price should not be treated as proof of what either spouse ultimately received. LegalClarity’s summary reports the listing and sale figures.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
What remains unresolved?
The appellate opinion requires further written findings on specified financial awards, but the sources cited here do not establish the outcome of those proceedings or a final distribution of all assets. They also do not establish how any reported proceeds from the apartment sale were divided. Without a later trial-court order or filing that answers those questions, the distribution should be described as unresolved.
Quick Recap
Rank #4
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
