Simon Guobadia Determined to Stop Porsha Williams

Last month The Real Housewives of Atlanta cast member, Porsha Williams, won a hard fought battle to film inside the Georgia mansion she once shared with her estranged husband, Nigerian businessman Simon Guobadia [click here if you missed that]. 

Simon is not going down without a fight...

From In Touch

The 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.

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.”

The ruling is pending.