No Longer Anyone’s Accessory Chapter 27
A week later. The news buzz still hadn’t faded. I was in my London office when Corbin called.
“Ms. Whitfield. Something you need to know about.”
“Go ahead.”
“Trevor has retained a new lawyer. He’s filed a motion trying to overturn the earlier property settlement and stake a retroactive claim on your patent proceeds.”
I straightened up.
“On what grounds?”
“The argument: your XR-7 research got underway during the marriage. Even though the patent agreement was signed after the divorce was finalized, the underlying scientific work was carried out during the marital period. So they’re claiming this income is community marital property and should be split fifty-fifty.”
“Under California law, does that argument hold any water?”
“There’s a certain gray area to it. California courts have precedents where, if the substantive development of intellectual property was completed during the marriage, post-divorce proceeds can be partly clawed back. However —”
“However what?”
“Your case has extremely unusual, highly specific characteristics. Your XR-7 work during the California period was purely exploratory — literature search, early-stage screening. Every core breakthrough happened in London, after the formal separation. All four key innovations were documented and timestamped post-separation. The technical heart of this patent falls entirely and exclusively within intellectual labor you completed on your own, after separation.”
“How much room do we have to build a defense?”
“A rock-solid line of defense: the core substance of the patent has nothing to do with the marriage. The key breakthroughs were finished by you alone, after separation. And we press the equitable angle — he contributed nothing whatsoever to the household across three years of marriage, and instead actively drained assets, badly violating his basic duties as a spouse. A judge will absolutely weigh that.”
“So the worse he behaved in the marriage, the stronger our case.”
“You could put it that way.”
“Then the optics are perfect. Because he’s already proven, through his own actions, that he’s a human-shaped walking disaster.”
Corbin let out a soft laugh.
“Ms. Whitfield. I’m going to need one thing from you.”
“What’s that?”
“A detailed comparative timeline chart, cross-referencing your scientific progress during the California period item by item against the London period. It has to prove, beyond dispute, that the core breakthroughs came after separation. That means lab records, time-stamped log backups, and a formal sworn affidavit from Dr. Ashcombe.”
“Easy. I’ll have legal and Dr. Ashcombe issue the formal verification documents.”
“There’s one more thing —”
“One more?”
“Trevor’s new lawyer. Goes by Roland Pruett. He has a bit of a name in Bay Area family law circles. Known behind closed doors as an ‘ambulance chaser’ — the sort who feeds off other people’s misfortune. His tactics are extremely dirty.”
“What does that mean in practice?”
“He may try to run a smear campaign. Try to paint you as having some improper relationship in London — imply the whole thing was your scheme from the start. Wreck your moral standing in front of the judge. Claim you’ve been quietly funneling assets to a new lover.”
“I have no romantic involvement in London. No one. At all.”
“I know that. But a guy like Pruett is perfectly capable of spinning an insinuating story out of one completely innocent photo. Have you had any contact at all with any man lately that could be twisted out of context?”
I cast my mind back.
“No.”
“Good. Keep your social accounts clean. Give him nothing to respond to.”
“Mr. Sloane.”
“Here.”
“No matter what filthy little tricks he tries. He will not get a single cent from me.”
“Ms. Whitfield. At this point, I don’t have the smallest shred of a doubt about that.”
