NEW YORK _ A Manhattan judge has denied the request by Harvey Weinstein's ex-wife to get a $5 million prepayment on future child support.
Justice Michael Katz "tossed" the bid in its entirety, according to a source with knowledge of the decision.
Former wife Eve Chilton appeared in court last month to request the cash before Weinstein's fortune likely gets swallowed up by legal bills.
The 65-year-old movie mogul is facing a tsunami of allegations ranging from sexual harassment to rape from scores of women.
He was fired from The Weinstein Company in the wake of two blockbuster exposes in the New York Times and New Yorker, and multiple actresses have already filed lawsuits.
Chilton's lawyer Harriet Cohen was not available for comment.
According to the judge's decision, Weinstein must continue to pay his child support payments on time, and Chilton has the right to return to court if he misses any. A second source said Katz denied Chilton's bid for the hefty advance because Weinstein never missed any payments.
Chilton, a former Weinstein assistant who divorced the Oscar winner after 17 years of marriage in 2004, has three children with Weinstein: Remy, 22; Emma, 19; and Ruth, 14.
At the hearing last month, Chilton's lawyers argued she should not be at the mercy of Weinstein's cloudy future.
Her lawyer Bonnie Rabin argued Weinstein's finances were on the brink of being depleted by "many, many lawyers, many, many millions of dollars to defend himself against lawsuits all over the world."
"He's going to have very little left," she continued. "(There) are lawsuits not in four to five states, but perhaps four to five countries."
The $5 million sought by Chilton included more than $1.4 million in basic child support payments; $500,000 for health care; $124,000 for statutory add-ons; $500,000 for college and college prep; and various other expenses, plus money still owed to Chilton from the recent sale of a property in Westport, Conn.
Weinstein attorney Steven Silpe told the court Weinstein paid $850,000 to Chilton over the last year alone.
Lawyers for the disgraced mogul also argued Katz would set a dangerous precedent if he ruled for Chilton.
