Divorce filings reveal spousal support dispute between Kristi, Bryon Noem

Kristi Noem and her estranged husband, Bryon Noem, have reached a consensus that their marriage is over. Yet, the legal documents submitted to initiate the split highlight a sharp divergence regarding financial maintenance, specifically concerning which party might be entitled to receive payments.

Conflicting claims on monthly payments

The former South Dakota governor filed for divorce on September 28, explicitly requesting to retain her right to seek support from her spouse. In his subsequent response, Bryon adopted the opposing stance, arguing that he should be the one eligible to collect monthly payments rather than Kristi.

Court records indicate that Bryon acknowledged irreconcilable differences had terminated the union. However, his filing directly contested Kristi’s position on the matter of financial assistance. While Kristi’s petition left open the possibility of her requesting spousal support, Bryon’s counter-filing urged the court to consider awarding support to him instead.

Adult children remove support factor

TMZ reports that the couple shares three children, all of whom are now adults. Consequently, child support obligations do not play a role in the current divorce dispute as described in the coverage.

This financial disagreement emerges months after media reports surfaced detailing issues within the couple’s marriage. A Daily Mail report previously made allegations regarding Bryon’s online activity. According to TMZ, that report claimed he exchanged messages with individuals online while wearing fake breasts.

Kristi’s representative stated she felt “devastated” and “blindsided” by these allegations. The outlet later reported that Kristi proceeded with the divorce filing.

Attorney cites hope for amicable resolution

Following the filing, Tim Bottum, an attorney representing Bryon, said his client felt “saddened that the marriage is ending.” Bottum also noted that Bryon hoped the couple could reach a “private and amicable resolution.”

Their respective court submissions demonstrate that the two parties do not fully align on the financial terms of their separation. Neither filing established that either party will actually receive spousal support. Instead, both sides appear to want the option to seek it as the divorce proceeds.

The dispute therefore centers on a key financial question: whether Kristi or Bryon could ultimately receive support from the other.