Brad Pitt demands to know if Angelina Jolie gagged staff after accusing him of more abuse
Brad Pitt launches legal campaign to force Angelia Jolie to reveal how many gag order agreements she has asked employees to sign – after accusing her of trying to use harsh Agreement to “control” her.
The Oscar winner is Engaged in a years-long battle About their divorce, custody of their children, and custody of Chateau Miraval.
Earlier this week, Jolie made explosive claims that Pitt had physically abused her more times than she previously claimed on a private flight in 2016, and claimed there were other instances before that.
She also claimed that Pitt asked her to sign an NDA (non-disclosure agreement) as part of an “unreasonable” attempt to “control” her during Miraval sale negotiations.
Because of this, she said, she refused to sell her stake in the vineyard to Pete, and in 2021 she sold her stake in the vineyard to Russian billionaire Yuri Scheffler. The ex was furious.
On Friday, Pitt’s attorneys retaliated by asking Jolie to disclose other confidentiality agreements she has with third parties, including her own personal staff.
His attorney, John Berlinski, said in the legal filing that “if Jolie’s continued employment was conditioned on that person agreeing to a nondisclosure agreement covering things they praised in her home, including her treatment of her children, and Pitt, then it would be very likely whether she actually believed the terms Pitt was asking for were an “unreasonable gag order.”
“The same goes for any confidentiality agreements between Jolie and any third parties with whom she has a relationship or who assist in the care of the couple’s children.
“If Jolie is asking this third party to remain silent about her family or family life, especially without a business reason, that speaks volumes about whether Jolie actually views the non-disclosure agreement Pitt is requesting in connection with Miraval’s business as a The trader she later claimed.”
The court was shown an April 2021 letter from Jolie’s legal team, which included a draft of her own non-disparagement agreement, and another letter from her U.S. divorce lawyer six months after she exited the Miraval sale, apparently also indicating A wider confidentiality agreement was signed as part of her divorce from Pitt.
Jolie’s attorney, Paul Murphy, told Page Six, “It’s frankly disgraceful that Pitt would equate ordinary nondisclosure agreements covering confidential information employees learn at work with his attempts to cover up his history of abuse.
“All she wants is separation and health. She deserves peace after all these years.”
CNN has reached out to Pete for comment.
The latest chess move comes as Jolie claims in legal documents that Pitt is Insult her The infamous plane crash in 2016 led to her filing for divorce.
As part of the former couple’s ongoing dispute over Miraval, the actress’s legal team filed a motion on April 4 seeking to release communications they said would prove that Pitt, 60, would not let the 48-year-old Julie sold her shares in the winery to him unless she agreed to a “more onerous” and “extensive” confidentiality agreement.
In the new filing, Jolie’s lawyers claim, “While Pitt’s history of physical abuse of Jolie began long before the family’s September 2016 plane trip from France to Los Angeles, the flight marked the beginning of his The first was physical abuse of the children. Julie left him immediately afterwards.”
But a friend of Pitt’s told Page Six, “This case is not about what happened on the plane in 2016. It’s about whether they had an agreement not to sell their property at the winery and family home without each other’s consent.” Equity. That’s the issue.” Brad and his team are focusing on this, and so far the legal momentum has been on their side.
“The confidentiality agreement that Jolie was asked to sign was a standard commercial contract designed to protect the asset being sold – in this case her stake in Chateau Miraval. It’s unclear why she thought it was so unreasonable because Her own lawyers suggested a mutual restraint clause as part of their divorce and they divorced a few months later.”
A Luxembourg court temporarily stripped Scheffler of the 10% stake he purchased from Jolie, effectively making Pitt the majority shareholder.
While Jolie will continue to fight to have Pitt’s primary breach of contract claim dismissed, which is pending in California, Pitt has asked Los Angeles Superior Court to unwind the sale entirely.
A disclosure hearing will be held on May 16. A full trial is not expected to take place this year.
