Former Baywatch hunk David Hasselhoff has won a court order to return to his family home to retrieve certain possessions that were apparently worth, to him, an extra few visits to court.

So, what couldn't the Hoff live without?

Among the items listed were: an antique barber's chair, an ivory tusk, a statue of a dolphin, a model elephant, and some baseball memorabilia. I guess he already has his Baywatch float in his new digs.

Hoff and his ex Pamela Bach's divorce was settled in December, tying up loose ends like spousal and child support, and custody issues of the couple's two daughters. The two share custody, though any monetary details of the split were not released.

I suppose this is just more evidence of boys becoming rather attached to their toys.

Click here to read more.

(Photo: AP)

The Good...
Former sweethearts Heath Ledger and Michelle Williams are trying to make their daughter as comfortable as possible by decorating her bedrooms at their respective houses exactly the same. Reps say this is so their two-year-old won't feel uncomfortable when visiting Daddy. Momma Michelle got the former family house of course. It's sweet to see a couple that cares that much about their kid! Very much like...

The Bad...
Brad Garrett and his ex — while I would like to put the news of his divorce under "good", simply because of the seemingly amicable way it was handled and settled, let's face it, divorce is never all good. The two have agreed to share legal and physical custody of their two children, and Brad is paying his former spouse $20,000 a month in child support and $35,000 a month in spousal support. Damn, those Raymond reruns must pay off big time. At least he's not...

Donna D'Errico, who was refused a delay in her divorce from Motley Crue band member Nikki Sixx. Her reasons for delaying the trial were due to her health and her claims that she could not find a new attorney because of wildfires. The judge apparently felt that she represented herself well enough in court to deny her request. He offered no sympathy in regards to her lack of representation since she fired her most recent attorney. It's not all fun in the sun for this former Baywatch babe, but it can always be worse. And that brings us to...

It's probably because it's something we'd like to do ourselves if we had unlimited funds and the backing of the American public. Who wouldn't like to embarrass their ex in front of millions?

The thing is, that's the real motivation for many celebs. It's the divorce game on a grand scale, and strategy is of the utmost importance if you want to retain your money, child custody, and a good enough public image to be able to work again.

Private staff become chess pawns. One unnamed person paid their housekeeper double to ensure her loyalty during proceedings. Nannies are called upon to make declarations of drug or alcohol abuse. Investigators get hired, professionals called in to make assessments, and all these services add up.

You'd think such actions would indicate a great desire for the parties in question to have their kids. In the Britney Spears case, most of their debate has been about custody lately. With Heather Mills' latest rants on camera, Paul McCartney is using her claims against her in an attempt to take full custody of their daughter. I reported earlier in the week how her opening up could be more damaging than helpful to her case. She's just trying to play the game too, although she's clearly not very good at it.

At some point, it seems the focus gets away from the kids. It's just about winning, and celebrities don't mind stretching things out as long as it takes — they can blow a million or two on divorce-related costs and not really feel it. At the end of the day, if their significant other ends up looking bad, that's what counts. If they walk away with the children, that's even better.

Former New York Stock Exchange chairman Dick Grasso might be sweating a little. A new book discussing Grasso's time on the NYSE reveals that he was questioned about having an extramarital affair and fathering a child with his supposed mistress.

In 2004, then-State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed a suit against Grasso seeking to reclaim over half of the money he made during his eight years as chairman. Mr. Grasso was paid around $190 million dollars, which Spitzer contends is a violation of state laws governing not-for-profit organizations.

Most of the testimony was released to the public already, but this particular interview was kept under wraps until now. Grasso was interrogated about a woman named Karen Ross, a childhood friend of his.

The personal nature of the questions stemmed from emails that Spitzer seemed to think were indicative of an affair. Whether the alleged affair is current or past wasn't specified. Apparently, Grasso paid part of Ms. Ross's daughter's college tuition, and Spitzer asked him point blank if the child were related to him in some way. The only way she could be is if he had fathered her.

Grasso never lost his cool, but his attorney fired back that the subject matter being discussed wasn't related at all to the case and it was private information. The question was asked again and Grasso simply replied, "No."

Admittedly, this doesn't make Grasso look nearly as bad as the Attorney General's office, but still — if I were Mrs. Grasso, I might be checking out his emails just in case.

Click here for more.