Billionaire’s estranged wife makes wild claim about his pregnant new fiancée as they squabble over his money

The estranged wife of billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson has claimed that his new fiancée’s pregnancy was part of a ‘calculated plan’ to plunder his $5.1 billion fortune.

Paulson, who has two college-aged daughters with wife Jenny Paulson, reportedly informed his kids of the pregnancy via a text message, which included a link to a news exclusive.   

In a recent court filing, Jenny’s attorney argues that the unborn baby is part of a ‘calculated plan’ to grant fiancée Alina de Almeida, 36, access to ‘marital assets’ and to ‘pit’ a new child against the 68-year-old billionaire’s two daughters. 

The couple’s divorce proceedings began in 2021 after Jenny discovered Paulson’s relationship with de Almeida. 

Paulson has since proposed to de Almeida and has been fighting to dismiss Jenny’s legal bid to uncover the trusts holding his wealth.

In a recent court filing, Jenny’s attorney argues that the pregnancy was part of a ‘calculated plan’ to grant de Almeida, 36, access to ‘marital assets’ and to ‘pit’ a new baby against the 68 year old’s two daughters (Pictured: Jenny Paulson, left, estranged wife of US billionaire hedge fund manager John Paulson, right)

A source close to Paulson told Page Six that his daughters were informed of the pregnancy before the Page Six announcement. However, Jenny’s legal team, led by high-powered divorce lawyer Robert Cohen, has filed an amended complaint.

Earlier this month, de Almeida told Page Six that she and Paulson were ‘very excited’ about the upcoming arrival of their child. She stated that the pregnancy was ‘something we had been planning’ and that she believed Paulson would be a great father.

Jenny’s amended complaint argues that the pregnancy violates the Domestic Relations Law by creating a situation where a child born outside the marriage could potentially receive distributions from the trust.

‘Mr. Paulson has now unilaterally acted to plan and expand that class of beneficiaries to include a child born outside the marriage to another woman and — because of the terms of the trust — created a situation where that child’s mother may also seek distributions from the trust,’ according to Jenny’s complaint. 

A source familiar with the case questioned whether Paulson or de Almeida considered the potential financial benefits of having a child out of wedlock during the divorce proceedings. 

‘Did Mr. Paulson or his girlfriend consider, as part of what she said was the ‘plan’ to get pregnant, that having a child out of wedlock during the divorce proceeding might financially benefit the girlfriend?’ the source told Page Six. 

The filing claims that Paulson has violated the law by starting a new family while still married to Jenny.

‘Taking marital property and giving it to someone entirely outside the marriage, including your new girlfriend – that is the very definition of a violation of the Domestic Relations Law,’ the document reads.

‘Adding another beneficiary and … permitting Mr. Paulson’s new girlfriend, with whom he has no legal relationship, to seek distributions from the Trust on behalf of the new beneficiary, Mr. Paulson has added yet further discord, pitting the children of his marriage against his future children and girlfriend.’

Pictured: Former President Donald Trump, right, stands with Melania Trump, second from right, as they are greeted by John Paulson, left, and Alina de Almeida, second from left, at a GOP fundraiser

Paulson’s attorney, Marilyn Chinitz, has denied the allegations and accused Jenny of attempting to ‘enrich herself’ at the expense of her children. 

‘Despite the fact that she will remain one of the richest women in the world following this divorce, Jenny continues to push to take money away from her children to enrich herself because she finds it humiliating that her daughters would be worth more than her as a result of the irrevocable trusts set up for the children,’ the lawyer said in a statement.

‘John has moved on with his personal life and would hope that Jenny would do the same, rather than push for years of needless litigation.’ 

Chinitz maintains that the trusts will ensure that both Paulson’s and Jenny’s children are financially secure for generations to come.