Lisa Marie Presley's Ex Accuses Her Of Withholding Information, 'Game Playing' In Nasty Divorce

“While Ms. Saltsman testified about one conversation that she claimed she had with Mr. Alan Neiman, Lockwood’s former attorney, Respondent was unable to verify her claims about the conversation or when it occurred because she withheld her noted and her time/billing records,” wrote Lockwood’s attorney, Jeff Sturman, in the affidavit.

“Moreover, there were several questions where Ms. Saltsman testified that she did not recall the facts, and that there were no non-privileged documents that would refresh her recollection."

“Respondent filed his Motion in Liminie to prevent his being unfairly surprised and prejudiced by hearing Ms. Saltsman testify for the first time at trial about matters that she claimed that she could not remember in deposition unless she reviewed supposedly privileged documents she withheld, or about matters that Respondent was unable to verify because Petitioner and Ms. Saltsman withheld documents on privilege grounds."

Lockwood said he is not trying to prevent Saltsman from testifying in the upcoming trial, only that he wants information so he would not be unfairly surprised.

Meanwhile, Presley has said in court documents filed on July 27 that the postnuptial agreement is valid and enforceable, and what they both signed was “negotiated at length” between them and their respective attorneys.

Under the postnuptial agreement, both parties waive the right to receive spousal support at any time, said Presley’s attorney, Gary Fishbein, in the affidavit.

Presley also said Lockwood was “completely aware” that all property that she owned before and subsequent to their marriage would remain as her separate property.

Lockwood had a chance to negotiate the terms of the postnuptial agreement before signing, Fishbein wrote in the affidavit.

“Respondent’s current position of, ‘Gee, I didn’t know what I was signing,’ or his contradictory stories about when he had a lawyer, if he had a lawyer, etc., are not grounds for invalidating the Agreement,” Fishbein said. “If claiming ignorance or nonchalance were grounds to void a contest, then virtually no contact would be safe from attack."