Tanya Callau‘s attorney, Adam F. Streisand, confirmed to PEOPLE on Thursday that the petition filed against her in May by brothers Brennan and Robin Thicke — in which they claimed that Callau alleged that the prenuptial agreement she signed ahead of marrying Alan in 2005 is invalid — was tossed out.
“I am thrilled that I was able to get this bogus lawsuit thrown out of court for Tanya, whose only sin was that she loved her husband and has suffered grievously since losing him,” Streisand said in a statement to PEOPLE.
Callau has maintained that she had no plans to contest the prenup she signed, and the judge agreed saying there was no evidence she had planned to, according to The Patch, which first reported the news
Meanwhile, four-time Grammy nominee Robin tells PEOPLE he is ecstatic to hear that his stepmother will not be contesting the prenup.
The singer tells PEOPLE: “We are thrilled to hear that Tanya will no longer be contesting the validity of her pre-nuptial agreement with Alan, and has agreed to honor his last will and testament. Our father was a wonderful man, who all of us, loved very much.”
Callau also took to social media to celebrate the legal victory and thank the Growing Pains actor, to whom she was married for 11 years until his unexpected death in December, for watching over her.
“Thank you my angel for continuing to watch over me! Today was a good day 😊” she wrote on Instagram, accompanied with a throwback photo of herself and Alan walking hand-in-hand along a beach at sunset.
“Judge threw out my stepsons lawsuit. Reality check …… I only wish them the best and may we all start healing 🙏🏻” she concluded.
The judge has left the door open for Robin and his brother to take legal action down the road.
“I’m just saying I need more specifics,” L.A. Superior Court Judge Clifford Klein told Robin and Brennan’s attorney, Alex Weingarten, The Patch reports. “All I want to know is what is at stake in this case.”
Judge Klein told Weingarten that a new petition could be filed “if he has information supporting his clients’ assertions,” The Patch reports.
Five months after Alan — who passed away suddenly Dec. 13 at 69 years old after suffering a heart attack while playing hockey with his youngest son, Carter — was laid to rest, Brennan and Robin filed the petition against Callau.
Prior to his death, Brennan and Robin were named co-trustees of their father’s living trust if Alan’s brother, Todd Thicke, declined to take on the responsibility. (Todd did decline.)
In February 2016, the most recent iteration of Alan’s trust was signed; the two brothers alleged that Callau did not make any complaints about the estate or prenup at that time, according to the documents.
According to the documents, Alan left each of his sons “(in equal shares): ownership of the Carpinteria, California ranch that he bought in 1989 and desired to keep in his family forever (the “Ranch”), 75 percent of his personal effects, and 60 percent of his remaining estate.”
WATCH: Alan Thicke’s Sons Taking His Widow to Court Over Prenup She Claims Is Invalid
Callau was left “all of the Ranch’s furnishings, 25 percent of his personal effects, a $500,000 life insurance policy, all of his death benefits from pensions and union memberships … and 40 percent share of his remaining estate. Alan also provided that Tanya may live in the Ranch after his death so long as she maintains the property and expenses.”
But in the time since her husband died, Callau allegedly claimed that the prenuptial agreement she signed over 10 years ago is invalid.
“Nonetheless, despite Alan’s generous benefits and careful planning Tanya demands more. Tanya insists the Prenuptial Agreement that she entered into before marrying Alan is invalid,” the documents stated.
“Now that Alan is dead, Tanya claims there are numerous problems with the Trust and the Prenuptial Agreement,” attorney Alex Weingarten wrote in the petition.
“Tanya asserts that there is no chance the ‘Prenup’ could withstand legal challenge and that she has very significant community rights in the Trust’s assets and rights of reimbursement with respect to improvements to the Ranch. Tanya also claims ‘Marvin rights’ asserting that she had to forego opportunities to pursue and advance her own career in order to support Alan and be his companion and partner, including raising Carter,” Weingarten continued in the petition.
Weingarten also claimed that Callau had “threatened to make her claims fodder for ‘tabloid publicity’ unless the Co-Trustees agreed to participate in a mediation and succumb to her demands.”