Julia Haart’s four-and-a-half-year divorce from Silvio Scaglia may finally be over, but her former husband is now facing a no-bail arrest warrant and an order to spend 14 days in jail.
New York Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Pearlman found Scaglia in civil and criminal contempt after determining that he knowingly and willfully violated court orders during the former couple’s fight over their marriage and businesses, according to court papers obtained by Page Six.
The Sept. 22 order centers partly on Scaglia’s handling of business interests and money while the divorce was pending. The court papers say he transferred company interests and “siphon[ed]” assets despite restrictions on disposing of marital property during the case.
Haart, 55, addressed the development in her first interview since the divorce became final, telling Us Weekly that it is the second arrest warrant issued for Scaglia. His representatives did not respond to Page Six’s request for comment on the latest contempt ruling.
A Judge Ordered Scaglia Jailed for 14 Days
Pearlman’s Sept. 22 order directs that Scaglia be immediately incarcerated for 14 days and issues a bench warrant without bail for his arrest.
The finding is tied in part to actions involving companies at the center of the former couple’s financial dispute. New York matrimonial cases impose automatic restrictions intended to prevent spouses from disposing of property while a divorce is pending. The state’s official court rules prohibit either party from selling, transferring, concealing or otherwise disposing of property without written consent or a court order, subject to limited exceptions including ordinary business and household expenses.
The rules also state that violations can result in contempt of court. Scaglia’s new jail order stems from a criminal-contempt finding within the matrimonial proceedings. The available court reporting does not establish that prosecutors separately indicted him on a criminal charge.
Haart Says Scaglia Moved Their Company During the Divorce
Haart told Us that the dispute involved Freedom Holding, the company through which she and Scaglia held business interests including Elite World Group. She said Scaglia moved the company out of their jointly owned structure during the divorce and filed documents identifying himself as its sole owner.
Scaglia’s compliance with court orders had already become an issue before the latest contempt finding. In April 2026, New York’s Appellate Division upheld a lower court decision striking his divorce pleadings and entering a default judgment against him.
The appellate court said the record established repeated violations of court orders, including failures or refusals to provide ordered discovery, pay court-ordered counsel fees and other fees, and attend conferences. The panel upheld the default judgment while sending portions of the financial awards back to the lower court for additional factual findings.
Those awards had included a 50% interest in Freedom Holding and its subsidiaries, $7.4 million in unpaid management fees and half of the proceeds from the sale of a painting owned by the company. The appeals court required additional findings supporting those financial determinations and directed that certain amounts already received by Haart be placed in escrow in the meantime.
This Is Scaglia’s Second Arrest Warrant
The Sept. 22 warrant follows a separate arrest order issued during the divorce fight in June 2024. At the time, a judge ordered Scaglia to serve 20 days in jail after he failed to appear for a contempt hearing and had not paid nearly $300,000 in court-ordered legal fees owed to Haart.
Page Six reported that the court also moved to revoke Scaglia’s passport and driver’s license after he failed to appear. Scaglia was reported to be in Italy, and Us says he never served the 20-day sentence.
The two warrants stem from different conduct. The 2024 order involved Scaglia’s failure to appear and unpaid legal fees, while the new order concerns conduct during the divorce that Pearlman found amounted to civil and criminal contempt.
The Divorce Ended With Haart Taking Control of Elite World Group
View this post on Instagram
The latest contempt ruling came days after Haart announced that the divorce itself had finally ended. She filed in February 2022, shortly after being removed as CEO of Elite World Group, and the split became intertwined with litigation over ownership and control of businesses she and Scaglia had run together.
When the divorce was finalized in September, Page Six reported that Haart received full ownership of Elite World Group, the former couple’s Tribeca residence and financial awards tied to money the court found Scaglia had removed from their businesses.
Us reports that the judgment includes at least $17.4 million in direct cash awards to Haart, along with half of an estimated $25 million in disputed business withdrawals. Haart celebrated the finalized divorce on Instagram with her children Batsheva, Shlomo, Miriam and Aron, writing, “The divorce is FINAL. This chapter is closed.”
Haart Says She Still Doesn’t Feel Completely ‘Free’
Haart told Us that she had been waiting more than a year for the court to decide the contempt application behind the latest warrant and does not yet feel completely free despite the end of the marriage.
Scaglia disputed Haart’s allegations at several points during their broader litigation. Earlier in the divorce, he accused her of improperly taking company money and keeping a company-owned Bentley after she was fired from Elite. Haart denied wrongdoing, and litigation over statements accusing her of taking the vehicle reached New York’s Appellate Division in 2024.
The breakup and corporate fight also became part of the second season of Netflix’s My Unorthodox Life, which followed Haart after her removal from Elite and the beginning of the divorce proceedings.
She Says Marriage Is Off the Table for Her Future
Haart told Us that she may begin dating again in the new year but has no intention of marrying for a third time. She joked that her will even contains a provision allowing her children to intervene financially if she decides to marry again.
She said she still believes in love and long-term partnership but would prefer a relationship in which both people continue choosing to remain together rather than being bound by marriage.