They separated and filed for divorce on April 21, 2005, but reconciled before breaking up again in April 2007. Court files also reveal that Bell finalized his divorce only on September 18, 2008. In her second divorce petition, Kimberly claims: `In April 2007, at Bell`s request, I quit my full-time job as a school teacher... so that I could relocate with him to New York where he is currently playing for the New York Giants. `This was due to the fact that during the time we were together, he would often fly back and forth between New York and California. `After quitting my job, I learned a week later that he decided to leave without me to live permanently in New York, and has retained an attorney to initiate divorce proceedings.` Bell`s decision to file for divorce `came as a complete shock` to Kimberly, says her lawyer, Nigel Burns, in a court document filed in May 2007. `She quit her job at his urging.` Abandoned by her husband, Kimberly Bell struggled to pay household bills on her $3,577-a-month teacher`s salary, while Bell earned a staggering $595,000 a year playing for the Giants, court papers reveal. `Although (Bell) currently grosses $595,000 per year, he only pays me $5,000 per month in spousal support,` Kimberly complained in one legal document. `Out of this amount I have to pay the mortgage on the home we purchased together, which is approximately $3,200 per month.` While Bell`s income now is unclear, the papers claim the two-year contract he signed in 2006 with the Giants was for $595,000 a year and that he received a signing bonus of $400,000. Bell `and his business partner` bought three Californian properties, in Placentia, Huntington Beach and Corona Del Mar, they say. Despite Kimberly`s accusations, Bell insists he did not trick his wife into quitting her teaching job only to move to New York and dump her. `I absolutely deny that I ever asked Kimberly to quit her full-time employment or to even move to New York to be with me,` he claims in a declaration to the court filed in January 2008. He claims that his ex `is simply attempting to convince this court that I should pay more support than what she requires because she intentionally minimized her employment income over a short period of time in hopes of reconciling our marriage.`