A high-profile, pseudo-celebrity divorce in Los Angeles is showing how costs multiply when parties fail to comply with a judge’s orders. According to msn.com, DeAnna Pappas, an alum of The Bachelorette, “scored a six-figure win after a Los Angeles judge ordered [her ex-husband Stephen] Stagliano to pay her $109,000 she said she was owed under their divorce settlement, along with $27,240 in legal fees.” This means that Mr. Stagliano must pay about 25 percent more than he would have if he had simply turned the money over two years ago.
For “Reality Stars,” the Drama Continues
For readers unfamiliar with what’s known as “Bachelor Nation,” DeAnna Pappas was a contestant on ABC’s reality TV show, The Bachelor, in 2007. She proved so popular with the audience that ABC cast her as the lead in the 2008 season of The Bachelorette. That season concluded with Ms. Pappas becoming engaged to professional snowboarder Jesse Csincsak. After that engagement only lasted a few months, Ms. Pappas picked up a number of reality TV gigs, including “a co-hosting job on Get Married (2007), a daily TV show on the Lifetime TV cable network, that helps brides plan every aspect of their weddings.”
In 2009, ABC broadcast a special titled The Bachelorette: The Men Tell All. According to US Magazine, Michael Stagliano, a Bachelorette contestant in 2009, introduced Ms. Pappas to his twin brother, Stephen. Ms. Pappas and Stephen Stagliano got engaged in August 2010. They married in 2011 and went on to have two children, Addison and Austin. They divorced in 2024.
At the time of the breakup, Ms. Pappas posted a statement on Instagram, writing, “It is with immense sadness that Stephen & I have decided to end our relationship as a couple. We have been working hard for a long time — both as a married couple & as individuals & have come to the conclusion to remain separate. We remain loving parents to our beautiful children.”
So why would a divorce settled in 2024 still be playing out in court in July 2026? The website msn.com reported, “The dispute centered on money Stagliano moved out of a retirement account in which Pappas had an interest.” This is money Ms. Pappas claims she is owed, and Mr. Stagliano has not yet agreed to turn over.
Msn.com stated, “The court recently reduced Stagliano’s child support obligation after he lost his job in the gaming industry and began driving for Uber. Pappas has also said she is struggling financially after losing her job and earns about $2,618 per month as a flight attendant.”
US Magazine reports that “Court documents filed by Stephen in September 2025 gave a glimpse into his occupation.” Those papers indicate that Mr. Stagliano “works as an Uber driver…around 10-15 hours per week and earns around $22 per hour.” Mr. Stagliano told the court, “My only sources of income are from unemployment and driving Uber. My last paycheck was $3,750 from Story Games on March 1, 2025.”
We can understand Mr. Stagliano’s distress about his current financial situation. But the money he was to share with Ms. Pappas was sitting in a retirement account. It should have been divided through a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), which would have avoided any penalties for early withdrawal. If he has been relying on this money to meet his current household expenses, the penalties were likely substantial. These circumstances also raise the question of how much of the funds remain. It is possible that Ms. Pappas has won a judgment she will not be able to collect. In that case, we can expect the couple back in court for collection enforcement, such as seizure of Mr. Stagliano’s assets and/or a garnishment of his earnings. That would once more raise the cost of the divorce litigation.
Mr. Stagliano did not contest the debt; he simply denied malice in refusing to transfer the funds.
A Predictable Loss that Only Added to the Defendant’s Costs
Either Mr. Stagliano got bad legal advice or chose to ignore good advice. In the divorce settlement, the parties had agreed to divide a retirement asset. Yet, Mr. Stagliano failed to comply. As one commentator opined, “He had an excuse, … but … no defense.” An experienced family law attorney likely would have advised Mr. Stagliano that he was unlikely to prevail on this issue. Heeding that advice would have saved him $27,240 in legal fees for Ms. Pappas, in addition to the legal costs his defense incurred. This was not a wise course for a part-time Uber driver earning $22 an hour.
The takeaway for anyone embroiled in a divorce is that costs can accelerate sharply when you litigate. Parties must choose their battles wisely, fighting only when they must. Attempting to relitigate a settled issue when you have no reasonable basis for expecting a better outcome is a poor use of resources.
Divorce is difficult enough without creating avoidable legal battles. If you have questions about enforcing a settlement, dividing retirement assets, or protecting your financial interests, the experienced family law attorneys at Bikel Rosenthal & Schanfield can help you understand your options and move your case forward strategically. Contact us today at 212.682.6222 or online to schedule a consultation.