Judge Dismisses Majority of Brad Pitt's Claims Against Angelina Jolie
Angelina Jolie's lawyer called Brad Pitt's vineyard lawsuit an attempt to "cover up serious abuse" in a statement to ET.https://t.co/vNKO67KmlF
- Entertainment Tonight (@etnow) March 20, 2024
• In June 2023, Pitt filed additional court documents accusing his ex-wife of intentionally trying to "inflict harm" on him and his interests in their winery. Pitt's lawyers claimed Jolie sold her stake in their winery to Shefler in an effort to damage Pitt's involvement in the company.
• After it was reported that Pitt recently scored a victory in his lawsuit against Jolie, a source knowledgeable about the case tells ET that a Federal court in Los Angeles, California, actually ruled against Pitt on Jolie's demurrer to his original complaint and dismissed five of the seven claims Pitt asserted against her.
• Jolie's attorney, Paul Murphy, gave a statement to ET regarding the judge's ruling on Jolie's demurrer: "The judge dismissed most of Mr. Pitt's claims because they don't have a legal basis. Mr. Pitt's lawsuit has never been about a business dispute; instead, it is about his attempts to cover up serious abuse, and we are gratified the judge has thrown out so much of Mr. Pitt's complaint. Angelina truly harbors no ill-will toward Mr. Pitt, and hopes he will now release her from his frivolous lawsuit, stop his relentless attacks, and join her in helping their family heal in private."
• In documents obtained by ET, one of the dismissed claims was brought under Luxembourg law, which the Court dismissed with prejudice, declining to recognize Luxembourg law in this case. This ruling is important because Pitt was trying to find a way to seek to recover his attorneys' fees incurred in this case and this was the only claim that gave him the potential to recover his fees. The court sustained this demurrer without leave to amend, which means Pitt can't recover his attorneys' fees either.
• The remaining two claims that haven't been dismissed are Pitt's claim that he had a secret, unwritten, unspoken implied contract with Jolie whereby she could not sell her interest in Miraval without his consent and a claim for quantum meruit based on the notion that Pitt did more work for Miraval.
• In regards to that secret, unwritten, unspoken implied contract, Jolie's lawyer said: "Of course, Pitt knows this, and Pitt concedes in his Complaint that there is no written contract granting him such a right. He could not even bring himself to allege that Jolie orally promised him that right. So he added a twist to try to explain this glaring hole in the factual record: the consent right is a secret. He claims he and Jolie granted each other this secret consent right through their “actions and conduct.”
Pitt offers no explanation for why this critically important right was never discussed or reduced to writing. He never explains exactly how or when this secret, unspoken agreement was reached. Nor does he explain why he and Jolie never told anyone about it-not their advisors, business partners, accountants, the press, or even their lawyers-nobody. The truth is that there is no such secret agreement. In fact, just days before buying Chateau Miraval, Pitt expressly refused in writing to enter any form of agreement controlling how he and Jolie could sell their interests."
• The court also dismissed three additional tort claims as well, meaning Jolie will not be exposed to punitive damages.
Source