Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are STILL hashing out their divorce after eight years
- Details
- Published on Wednesday, 17 July 2024 15:59
- Written by Daily mail
Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are still finalizing their divorce after eight years. The former couple, who were one of Hollywood's most iconic couples before calling it quits in September 2016, are reportedly 'slowly approaching a divorce settlement.' Still, a source told People that 'both sides are still talking' and their divorce negotiations are 'not done yet.' The former Mr. and Mrs. Smith costars, who share six children, were declared legally single by a judge back in 2019 as they continue their legal battle over Château Miraval and custody of their kids, who are legally adults, except their twins Knox and Vivienne, who will turn 16 on Friday. The exes are also parents to Maddox, 22, Zahara, 19, Pax, 20, Shiloh, 18. DailyMail.com has contacted both Pitt and Jolie's respective representatives for comment. Earlier this week, a source revealed to People that Pitt has 'virtually no contact' with his older children. 'He has virtually no contact with the adult kids. His engagement with the younger kids is more limited in recent months because of his filming schedule,' the insider shared. The source noted that the couple's custody agreement allows for visitation rights with the two minor kids. '[Angelina] has the kids most of the time, but per their agreement, he has visitation with the younger kids,' the insider added. The actor is on location in Europe filming his new racing movie F1, while Jolie lives in Los Angeles with their younger children. In June it was reported that Pitt is 'upset and aware' that his daughter Shiloh filed to drop his last name from her own on her 18th birthday. A source close to the Oscar winner said his erasure from his daughter's life is just another indication that he has 'lost his children,' according to People. 'He's aware and upset that Shiloh dropped his last name,' the source claimed. 'He’s never felt more joy than when she was born. He always wanted a daughter.' Notably, Pitt was already in the process of legally adopting a daughter who had been a part of his life for months before he and his then-partner Angelina had announced she was pregnant with Shiloh in January 2006.
Jolie had traveled to Ethiopia to adopt her first daughter Zahara in July 2005, and Pitt had come with her on the trip. He was reported to be in the process of becoming Zahara's adopted father in December 2005, a month before he and Jolie announced her pregnancy. 'The reminders that he’s lost his children, is of course not easy for Brad,' the source continued. 'He loves his children and misses them. It’s very sad.' They added that the distance between Pitt and his six children 'pains him.' However, they noted that 'he’s still happy with Ines [de Ramon],' his current girlfriend. Another source described as close to Pitt told the publication that the Tree Of Life star 'still loves all of his kids tremendously.' 'This whole process has been very hard for the whole family,' they added. If Shiloh's request is granted — and there is no indication that it would not be — she will subsequently go simply by 'Shiloh Jolie,' rather than her original full name, 'Shiloh Jolie-Pitt.' People previously reported that Pitt's youngest daughter Vivienne — who served as her mother's assistant when she produced the Broadways musical adaptation of The Outsiders — had listed her name as 'Vivienne Jolie' in the Playbill for the show. It is unclear if Vivienne has legally changed her name, but the minor would likely need either parental consent or extenuating circumstances to be allowed to do so before turning 18. Last month, Shiloh filed to drop Pitt from her last name. Meanwhile, their big sister, Zahara, previously introduced herself as 'Zahara Marley Jolie' when she joined the Mu Pi chapter of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority at Spelman College late last year. Pitt and Jolie's oldest sons, Maddox and Pax, have reportedly not publicly used their father's last name in years, and both have been openly antagonistic toward him. Pitt and Jolie began dating publicly shortly after he and his then-wife Jennifer Aniston announced their divorce in 2005. The Mr. And Mrs. Smith costars remained unmarried for years despite having multiple adopted and biological children together, but they got engaged in 2012 and finally tied the knot in 2014. However, it was only around two years later when the Maleficent actress filed for divorce in 2016. She and Pitt were declared legally single in 2019. However, the two A-listers have been embroiled in an ongoing divorce battle over assets and custody for years since. A central issue seems to be a notorious private jet confrontation in 2016. An FBI report on the incident, which was published in 2022, saw Jolie accuse Pitt of physical assault while flying to California in 2016. She claimed that he was intoxicated and that he grabbed her by the head and shook her, and later pushed her down, as part of a confrontation allegedly related to their children. Jolie told the FBI that Pitt told the children that she was 'f***ing up this family,' and she said he punched the ceiling of the airplane four times. She claimed that at one point he poured beer on her and a blanket she was under with multiple children. Sources close to Pitt later claimed that he never hit any of the children, though they admitted that he had been drinking.
| |
source : Daily mail ![]()
Angelina Jolie is ordered to turn over every NDA she signed with a third party from 2014 to 2022 after she claimed she walked out of Miraval sale due to Brad Pitt's 'cruel' gag order
- Details
- Published on Thursday, 23 May 2024 03:32
- Written by Daily mail
Angelina Jolie has been hit with another legal blow in her bitter battle with Brad Pitt over their Chateau Miraval estate, DailyMail.com can reveal.The Tomb Raider actress, 48, has been ordered by a judge in LA Superior Court to produce every NDA agreement that she signed with a third-party over an eight-year period from 2014 - the year they married - to 2022.Documents detailing the judge's decision were made public as part of the ongoing 'War of the Roses', with the A-List couple stuck in an acrimonious battle over her rights to sell their French vineyard and home.Jolie sold her $62million stake to Russian billionaire Yuri Shefler in 2021, which Pitt argues went against their agreement to offer the other the right of first refusal.NDA's have become a key battleground in the dispute over Chateau Miraval after Jolie claims she backed out of their agreement because Pitt, 60, asked her to sign a one as part of their business deal.She claims that it was an 'unconscionable' attempt by her ex-partner to 'control her' after their split in April 2019, with his lawyers asking LA Superior Court to unwind the sale because of their agreement to not sell to a third party.But Pitts attorneys have argued that Jolie's NDA objection was really just a cover story which she cooked-up to 'rationalize' her betrayal of Pitt by deciding to sell her stake behind his back.The Fight Club star's attorneys also claim that Jolie herself 'weaponized' NDAs, and asked for Pitt to sign a broader NDA just six months later as part of their divorce ttlement talks. Pitt's legal team asked in previous filings that she come clean about NDAs she entered into with third parties including staff.In a ruling made public on Wednesday, Judge Lia Martin dismissed Jolie's objections that her own NDAs had 'no relevance', agreeing with the motion filed by Pitt's team.She ordered the actress to produce all NDAs she proposed, or that were proposed to her by others, regardless of whether they were finalized or agreed.The ruling also obliges Jolie to produce NDAs entered into by companies she controls, as well as documents reflecting the reasons that she or her companies asked for the agreements within 60 days.Paul Murphy, one of Jolie's attorney's, told DailyMail.com the judge's order also opens the window for the actress to demand documents related to Pitt's alleged abuses.'Common NDAs are simply not comparable to Mr. Pitt’s last-second demand to try and cover up his personal misconduct,' Murphy said. 'We are more than happy to turn them over and we are gratified that the Court acknowledged that the only potential relevance is to the unconscionability of Mr. Pitt’s conduct, a now confirmed key issue in this case.'He continued, 'The judge’s ruling completely opens the door to discovery on all issues related to Pitt’s abuse. We welcome that transparency in all parties’ discovery responses, including Mr. Pitt’s. Angelina looks forward to the eventual end of this litigation with its false narratives that continue to hurt the family and interfere with their ability to heal.'
A source close to Brad, however, said Jolie's decision to use the NDA as a strategy 'as backfired spectacularly.''Her defense has been exposed as a house of cards, and she will now have to provide details of all the NDAs she demanded of third parties.'There is no question that this is a huge setback for her. There’s a long way to go, but in the context of the case so far, this is a hugely important and far reaching ruling which will be problematic for her defense,' the source added. It comes less than two weeks after Jolie was accused of trying to drive a wedge between her estranged husband and their six kids in the aftermath of their split, according to court filings lodged at LA Superior Court.In an explosive declaration seen by DailyMail.com, a former bodyguard for the couple was informed by his own contractors that Jolie was pushing for her children to avoid Pitt when she had custody of them.Former British SAS solider Tony Webb worked for the family for more than 20 years, starting in 2000, but claims that Jolie fired him after two of his security personnel sided with Pitt after the split.According to documents lodged by Pitt's lawyers in May, Webb claims that the two colleagues were told by Jolie's personal assistant that she 'would sue' after it emerged that they might give evidence in the couple's custody battle.Documents submitted to the court, seen by DailyMail.com, state Webb's colleague told him he overheard Jolie 'encouraging the children to avoid spending time with Pitt during custody visits.'His declaration accuses Jolie of repeating her threat to sue the bodyguards in a follow up email, with Pitt's lawyers using the claims as part of their motion to force the actress to reveal her use of NDA's.NDAs are not typically used to gag witnesses coming forward to testify in court proceedings, though despite the threats Webb told the hearing that both his colleagues testified under subpoena.His comments make up part of the motion Pitt's team has now won, where Jolie is called a 'hypocrite' for claiming he wanted to use an NDA in the sale of their French vineyard to 'control' her – despite regularly gagging her own staff with similar contracts.Pitt's team argues that Jolie is 'using NDA's in an 'improper manner'. In a separate previous legal filing, Pitt's attorney John Berlinski argued that Webb's evidence shows that Jolie has 'weaponized' NDAs in a bid to keep the couple's 'family issues' under wraps.He added: 'The very thing that Jolie claims was so sacred to her that Pitt's proposed NDA caused her to renege on her deal to sell to him.'Jolie's use of NDAs to silence her security detail and attempt to prevent them from testifying truthfully in court about what actually happened behind closed doors bears a striking resemblance to Jolie's (false) allegations in this case that Pitt improperly used an NDA to 'silence' her.
'The only reason this motion is even before the Court is because of Jolie's ploy to turn this business dispute into a sideshow about family court matters.'In short, establishing that NDAs are a commonplace feature of Jolie's personal and professional life, and entirely routine for her, goes directly to the credibility of her defense— regardless of the precise terms or subject matter of any one particular NDA.'He went on to accuse Jolie of using the NDA proposal to 'introduce into this case the unfortunate circumstances related to the dissolution of the couple's marriage, claiming that the proposal engendered an 'emotionally devastating' reaction in her.'Berlinski added that her timeline 'does not work', claiming that the confidentiality agreement suggested by Pitt was provided after she 'opened negotiations' with the Russian billionaire.The arguments come after Pitt has landed several legal victories in the battle for the winery including a key judgement in Luxembourg which handed him back control of the award-winning vineyard pending further hearings.In March, LA Superior court rejected the allegations that his suit was 'frivolous, malicious, and part of a problematic pattern.'A source close to Angelia, however, said Brad only fought to obtain the NDAs as further retribution against the actress.'Pitt and his team know that these NDAs are never going to see the light of day at trial,' a source told DailyMail.com.'They also know that this will force Angie to spend resources tracking all of this information down, which is just another way to drain her resources and punish her for leaving.'
![]() |
source : Daily mail
![]()
Angelina Jolie could be ordered to hand over staff NDAs as judge indicates she may side with Brad Pitt in Miraval wine court battle
- Details
- Published on Friday, 17 May 2024 05:22
- Written by Daily mail
Brad Pitt is poised to take a big win in court in his ongoing battle with ex Angelina Jolie after a judge said she would grant the actor’s request to force Jolie to turn over nondisclosure agreements she has entered into – including those signed by her staff.The pair continue to fight over her decision to sell her shares of the $500million business to a Russian businessman. Pitt maintains that they agreed, as part of their divorce, not to sell any shares in the company without the other's agreement. In court on Thursday, Pitt’s attorneys argued the NDAs would be ‘highly probative’. Jolie sold her shares in the French winery to a Russian billionaire who controls the Stoli Group.Judge Lia Martin said she was ‘inclined to’ grant Pitt’s motion, which would mean Jolie has to turn over all the NDAs she has entered into with various third parties since 2014 - the year the former Hollywood power couple were married. Judge Lia Martin said the NDAs might help her determine what is or isn't a reasonable non-disclosure request. ‘I don’t see this as a character question,’ Judge Martin said to attorneys on both sides in a Downtown Los Angeles court on Thursday. ‘There maybe agreements that [Jolie] entered into with people that may have terms similar or not. The court is not making any findings today about admissibility of the documents.’ The judge said she could render her final order as soon as Thursday afternoon.Jolie’s attorneys disagreed with the judge’s tentative ruling and said Pitt’s demands for the NDA’s is being weaponized against the actress.Paul Murphy, one of Jolie’s attorneys, said Pitt is seeking access to the NDAs as a tactic to hide ‘years of abuse’ the actor inflicted against his client and their six children.Jolie has made explosive claims that Pitt physically abused her outside of the 2016 flight when their children were present. Her attorneys said Pitt made Jolie sign an NDA as part of an ‘unconscionable’ attempt to control her and her interests in Miraval.
In court documents, Jolie said their Miraval deal was scrapped after Pitt asked her to sign an NDA that barred her from publicly speaking out about the abuse allegations, including the September 2016 incident on a private jet where Pitt allegedly slapped one of their children and choked another.Five days after the flight Jolie filed for divorce, and in September 2021 she sold her stake in the French winery she co-owned with Pitt. 'She has gone to great lengths to try to shield their children from reliving the pain Pitt inflicted on the family that day,' Jolie's lawyers wrote in an affidavit obtained by DailyMail.com. 'But when Pitt filed this lawsuit seeking to reassert control over Jolie's financial life and compel her to rejoin her ex-husband as a frozen-out business partner, Pitt forced Jolie to publicly defend herself on these issues for the first time.'The years of abuse was the reason why Jolie refused to sell her shares of Miraval to Pitt and instead sold her stake to Russian billionaire Yuri Shefler in 2021, her attorneys have said in court filings.‘He wanted to cover up his conduct because he could not stomach what he is covering up,’ Murphy said in court on Thursday. ‘Mr. Pitt’s abuse, his cover-up and actions, gaslighting his children - that is what changed.’Murphy asked the judge to consider several factors if she approves Pitt’s request, including to limit the release of NDAs signed by Jolie from 2014 to 2021, and not agreements related to her companies.Murphy also argued Jolie should not be forced to turn over drafts of the NDAs because it would be 'a bridge way too far' and would keep the case from 'blowing up' into 'different sideshows.'Pitt’s attorney, John Berlinski, said they should be allowed to view Jolie’s NDAs related to all of her businesses since actors often use their company names when signing agreements.Berlinski also argued the NDAs would be relevant to the Miraval case since Jolie allegedly made others, including her staff, sign ‘gag orders’ to prevent them from talking about what they witnessed while they were employed at her home, including her treatment of Pitt and their children. ‘She was the one who weaponized the NDA and threatened to sue security guards simply if they testified,’ Berlinski said during Thursday’s hearing. ‘That’s significant.’
![]() |
source : Daily mail
![]()
Angelina Jolie is accused of sabotaging her six kids' relationship with Brad Pitt - as ex bodyguard claims the actress was overheard telling the children to AVOID spending time with their devoted dad
- Details
- Published on Friday, 10 May 2024 09:49
- Written by Daily mail
Angelina Jolie has been accused of trying to poison her children's relationship with Brad Pitt by telling them to shun the actor during custody visits, DailyMail.com can reveal. The Hollywood actress is accused of trying to drive a wedge between her estranged husband and their six kids in the aftermath of their split, according to court filings lodged at LA Superior Court. In an explosive declaration seen by DailyMail.com, a former bodyguard for the couple was informed by his own contractors that Jolie was pushing for her children to avoid Pitt when she had custody of them.Documents detailing the explosive claims were made public as part of the ongoing 'War of the Roses', with the A-List couple stuck in an acrimonious battle over her rights to sell their French vineyard and home. The Tomb Raider star sold her $62million stake to Russian billionaire Yuri Shefler in 2021, which Pitt argues went against their agreement to offer the other the right of first refusal. Pitt, 60, and Jolie, 48, have been locked in a long-running bitter battle over the Chateau Miraval estate, which produces an award-winning sparkling rosé. Former British SAS solider Tony Webb worked for the family for more than 20 years, starting in 2000, but claims that Jolie fired him after two of his security personnel sided with Pitt after the split. According to documents lodged by Pitt's lawyers today, Webb claims that the two colleagues were told by Jolie's personal assistant that she 'would sue' after it emerged that they might give evidence in the couple's custody battle. Documents submitted to the court, seen by DailyMail.com, state Webb's colleague told him he overheard Jolie 'encouraging the children to avoid spending time with Pitt during custody visits.' His comments make up part of the motion lodged by Pitt, where Jolie is called a 'hypocrite' for claiming he wanted to use an NDA in the sale of their French vineyard to 'control' her – despite regularly gagging her own staff with similar contracts. In his statement, Webb claims that two of his contractors were subpoenaed to give evidence at the estranged couple's custody hearings – exposing conversations between Jolie and the children.
He claims in the document that he typically took orders from Jolie's personal assistant Michael Vieira and became aware that the relationship between Pitt and Jolie broke down in 2016. According to Webb, the papers read, 'After their divorce SRS Global and I continue to provide security for Ms. Jolie, Mr. Pitt and their children. 'Shortly before two SRS global contractors testified in a court case that I understood was related to Ms Jolie and Mr Pitt's divorce and the custody of their children Mr. Vieira called me on my cell phone. 'He told me that he had heard that two contractors who provided personal security for Ms. Jolie through SRS Global might be testifying in the family court case. 'Mr. Vieira then asked me to stop the two individuals from testifying. I understood that Mr. Vieira was making this request on the behalf of Ms. Jolie,' Webb alleges in his declaration. Webb went on to say in the document that he had 'no power' to stop the two individuals from testifying because they were 'independent contractors' rather than his direct employees.The filings claim that Vieira then warned Webb that both men had 'entered into NDA's' with Jolie, and if they 'testified in the family law case, Jolie would sue them.' Webb added: 'I communicated this message to the two individuals over the phone and they both told me they planned to testify. 'One of the two individuals, Ross Foster, specified that he intended to testify regardless of the NDA if he received a court subpoena. 'When Mr. Foster told me this he told me also that if asked he would testify about statements he overheard that Ms. Jolie making to the children, encouraging them to avoid spending time with Mr. Pitt during custody visits'.Webb, from England, retired from military service to set up SRS Global Security Ltd before working for Pitt and Jolie. He spent more than a decade with the famous SAS service, and the Falklands veteran now works for Pitt following the pair's acrimonious split. His statement added that the work began with Jolie as 'individual assignments on movie sets', before running her security for the family in 2012 when they left the US.
His declaration accuses Jolie of repeating her threat to sue the bodyguards in a follow up email, with Pitt’s lawyers using the claims as part of their motion to force the actress to reveal her use of NDA’s. NDAs are not typically used to gag witnesses coming forward to testify in court proceedings, though despite the threats Webb told the hearing that both his colleagues testified under subpoena. This led to Jolie terminating SRS in June 2021, with Webb writing to Jolie to thank her for the work, adding: 'I also wrote that I was sad that we had become distant over the past few years and that I knew she blamed me for what my independent contractors had done. 'But that because they were self-employed, I could not control what they did or said as they were not employed directly by SRS Global'. 'Ms Jolie responded take good care as ever, Angie,' according to Webb's declaration. Pitt's team argues that Jolie is 'using NDA's in an 'improper manner'. In a separate previous legal filing, Pitt's attorney John Berlinski argued that Webb's evidence shows that Jolie has 'weaponized' NDAs in a bid to keep the couple's 'family issues' under wraps. He added: 'The very thing that Jolie claims was so sacred to her that Pitt's proposed NDA caused her to renege on her deal to sell to him. 'Jolie’s use of NDAs to silence her security detail and attempt to prevent them from testifying truthfully in court about what actually happened behind closed doors bears a striking resemblance to Jolie’s (false) allegations in this case that Pitt improperly used an NDA to “silence” her. 'The only reason this motion is even before the Court is because of Jolie’s ploy to turn this business dispute into a sideshow about family court matters. 'In short, establishing that NDAs are a commonplace feature of Jolie’s personal and professional life, and entirely routine for her, goes directly to the credibility of her defense— regardless of the precise terms or subject matter of any one particular NDA.'He went on to accuse Jolie of using the NDA proposal to 'introduce into this case the unfortunate circumstances related to the dissolution of the couple’s marriage, claiming that the proposal engendered an “emotionally devastating” reaction in her.'
Berlinski added that her timeline 'does not work', claiming that the confidentiality agreement suggested by Pitt was provided after she 'opened negotiations' with the Russian billionaire. The bodyguards' explosive claims are the latest chapter in the court battle, as Pitt is asking LA Superior court to unwind Jolie's October 2021 sale of her stake over claims she breached and agreement the pair had to offer the other first refusal on a sale if either wanted out. Jolie claims she backed out of selling to Pitt because he asked her to sign an NDA as part of the deal, which she found 'unconscionable'. But Pitts lawyers insist this is a smokescreen to rationalize her betrayal of the Oscar winner, with her proposing her ex-husband sign an NDA just six months later as part of her divorce talks. Part of their motion asks for Jolie to disclose any other NDA's that she entered with third parties – including her own personal staff.They argue that it could 'undermine her defense' and that disclosure of her NDAs will ultimately discredit Jolie's arguments over why she abandoned the talks with her estranged husband. Webb added in his statement that Vieira 'often asked' his company to 'provide hotel staff with NDA's and get signatures from them' on behalf of Jolie. Legal documents obtained by DailyMail.com in April revealed Pitt had branded Jolie a hypocrite for claiming he wanted to use the NDA to 'control' her. The arguments come after Pitt has landed several legal victories in the battle for the winery including a key judgement in Luxembourg which handed him back control of the award-winning vineyard pending further hearings. In March LA Superior court rejected the allegations that his suit was 'frivolous, malicious, and part of a problematic pattern.' A hearing on Pitt's NDA motion is to be decided during a hearing on May 16, while full trial over the issues is not expected this year.
![]() |
source : Daily mail
![]()
Angelina Jolie turns up heat in war with Brad Pitt over $500M winery Miraval as lawyers call his requests for NDAs 'unreasonable' and 'abusive'... after accusing him of trying to 'bleed her dry' in their ongoing bitter legal battle
- Details
- Published on Saturday, 27 April 2024 11:15
- Written by Daily mail
Angelina Jolie has turned up the heat on Brad Pitt as their war over $500M winery Chateau Miraval gets even uglier as her lawyers have called his request for NDAs 'abusive' just days after she had accused him of trying to 'bleed her dry' in their ongoing bitter legal battle. Pitt, 60, had recently filed a motion asking to see 48-year-old Jolie's NDAs with any third parties and now her lawyers have called the move 'expensive,' 'wasteful,' 'unreasonable,' and 'abusive' according to court documents obtained by Page Six on Friday. The publication reports that Jolie had argued in court documents that her ex had asked her to sign an expansive NDA in their 'scuttled' deal for the winery because he was trying to silence her from talking about allegations that he was abusive to she and her children including on a flight from France to California in 2016.Earlier this month Jolie's claims via her lawyers had been reported: 'While Pitt’s history of physical abuse of Jolie started well before the family’s September 2016 plane trip from France to Los Angeles, this flight marked the first time he turned his physical abuse on the children as well.' Now, according to Page Six, the actress is claiming in new court documents that turning over the other NDAs that she had signed would be an invasion of privacy to other parties - which the publication notes are presumably movie studios, brands and employees - as it reveals 'contracts that include Jolie’s compensation or compensation she paid to third parties.' Jolie's side has also claimed Pitt wanted her to sign an unfairly 'onerous' and 'expansive' NDA, 'covering Pitt’s personal misconduct, whether related to Miraval or not,' in exchange for her to sell her stake to him. Their deal had ultimately fell through as Jolie claims that it was due to the NDA and the actress proceeded to sell her shares to a Stoli Group subsidiary. Pitt has responded by opposing the Stoli deal while alleging that she had unfairly sold the stake out from under him. Earlier this month it was DailyMail.com exclusively reported that the ongoing legal battle - dubbed 'the war of the rosés' - saw Jolie accusing 'controlling' ex Pitt of 'financially draining her,' through the protracted legal battle over the winery that's dogged the couple since their split in 2016.
But while she seeks to claim her ex is 'bleeding her dry,' DailyMail.com can reveal that since their ten-year relationship ended in divorce after a two-year marriage, her fortunes have soared.Far from causing her funds to dwindle, a DailyMail.com investigation reveals that Jolie’s relationship with Pitt has helped enrich her by close to $100million.That money has come through loans, child support, gifts and the millions she garnered from the sale of her 50 percent share in the property at the heart of the dispute - Chateau Miraval – ten percent of which was a gift from Pitt.The couple’s former French home, a stunning 1,200 acre estate and vineyard was worth $60million when they bought it in 2008. Now, thanks to Pitt’s effort and investment in the business, it’s worth a staggering $164million.And, while Jolie, 48, appears to be crying poverty in her latest court filings, sources close to Pitt point out that the Tomb raider star had sufficient funds to sign a recent deal to take over 57 Great Jones Street, a unique Manhattan space once owned by Andy Warhol and previously rented for $60,000 a month.Jolie has signed an eight-year lease for the 6,600 square-foot property to use as a store to promote her fashion label, Atelier Jolie. In newly filed court documents obtained by DailyMail.com, the actress claims: 'It is extremely painful for Jolie to have to defend herself from Pitt's lawsuit – itself another example of Pitt's unrelenting efforts to control and financially drain her – especially because Pitt's false allegations as to the reasons the Miraval deal cratered can only proven by doing exactly what Jolie never wanted to do: Provide to the trier of fact the reason the Miraval deal failed, which was Pitt's demand for an NDA to cover up his history of physical and emotional abuse of Jolie and their family.' Says one source familiar with the situation: 'Angie says Brad is bleeding her dry – but it looks like she wants to bleed him dry.'Far from being out to ruin his ex, it looks like Brad has bent over backwards to support Angie and help her out financially in spite of her appearing to be so vindictive,' the source added.
Pitt had originally sought to buy Jolie out himself, to keep the winery 'in the family' should she want to opt out. But the deal collapsed amid acrimony.Pitt accused Jolie of breaching their purchase agreement when she sold her 50 percent stake in Chateau Miraval to Russian oligarch, Yuri Shefler, in 2021, without her ex-husband's consent. According to Jolie the earlier offer to sell it to Pitt for $54million imploded due to his demands.But friends of the Oscar-winning star of Upon a Time in Hollywood have stepped up to defend Pitt as a man who has been nothing but generous in his dealings with the actress. By 2018, Pitt had spent more than $1.3million on child support, including therapy for the children, as well as paying hundreds of thousands in sundry bills. According to sources Pitt has been consistent in his payment of these expenses for the past seven years during which time he is believed to have he has stumped up close to $10million in child support.When the then couple bought Miraval in 2008, Pitt took a 60 percent stake in the winemaking enterprise and estate while Jolie took 40 percent.Pitt poured millions into the estate, riding the rosé wave, and expanding the business in an effort that saw sales grow 300 percent.Soon the estate that they purchased for an estimated $60million was worth closer to $164million.By the time of their wedding Jolie had 'stopped investing' according to previously filed court records – something that she has denied. Still, Pitt transferred 10 percent of his share to her by way of a wedding gift in December 2013 'for the sum of 1Euro [never paid]' so that by the time of their marriage in August 2014, they were 50/50 equal partners.As well as this generous gift, Pitt gave his wife a rare Winston Churchill painting, 'Tower of Koutoubia Mosque' which she sold in March 2021 for $11.5million.He loaned her $8million to purchase her current Los Angeles home in 2018. Jolie bought the grand compound in Los Feliz, once home to Cecil B. DeMille for $24.5million and has since claimed that the $8million from Pitt was in the form of a loan which came with interest and a repayment plan.Ironically, she told Vogue that she chose the property because she wanted the children to be closer to their father who lives just five minutes away.Meanwhile, as the war over the sale of the winery plods on, Pitt has landed several legal victories in recent months including a key judgement in Luxembourg which handed him back control of Chateau Miraval's award-winning vineyard pending further hearings.Just last month he scored another win when LA Superior Court rejected Jolie's allegations that his suit was, 'frivolous, malicious, and part of a problematic pattern.'
![]() |
source : Daily mail
![]()












Share