Billionaire Harry Macklowe Buys East Hampton Home For $10 Million

During the ongoing and contentious divorce trial involving Linda and Harry Macklowe, the billionaire real estate developer’s attorney proclaimed, “He has nowhere to live!” Well, that pesky problem has been resolved, thanks to Mr. Macklowe’s purchase of 64 West End Road in the Village of East Hampton for $10,350,000. Better than a Motel 6!

The property, listed for $10.6 million as recently as June—after first going on the market for $19.5 million in 2014—sits on 2.7 acres on Georgica Pond. It contains 4 bedrooms and 4.5 baths in its 5,500 square feet with docking rights, in-ground pool and other awesome amenities that one would expect after laying out more than $10 million. We won’t even speculate as to why Mr. Macklowe’s new house is within viewing distance of his old house, where his soon-to-be-ex still lives.

Some readers might wonder why Mr. Macklowe, a longtime Hamptons resident, needed another place to live. Well, as the New York Post put it rather indelicately, “Harry Macklowe and French Fling Nab Hamptons Getaway,” referring to his mistress, Patricia Landeau, who is president of the French Friends of the Israel Museum, and who, at 62, is 18 years younger than her rich suitor.

Linda and Harry Macklowe have been married for 57 years, so there is a lot to untangle during the divorce proceedings. One of the more divisive issues is money—there is plenty of it, but it sure gets spent fast. According to one published account, Linda Macklowe took $10 million out of an account set up by her estranged husband from June 2016 to July 2017. One expense was $700,000 to charter yachts because she has been denied use of a boat she shared with her husband. There was $2.7 million for a painting, and, no surprise, more than $7 million for attorneys and their trial-related expenses. Apparently, settlement talks have not proved fruitful.

Mr. Macklowe is no stranger to conflict in East Hampton. In the 1990s, he battled with next-door neighbor Martha Stewart over trees and shrubs he had planted on Ms. Stewart’s property. The legal niceties were still being debated when Ms. Stewart simply removed the greenery.