Angelina Jolie filed new court documents in the Pitt Jolie Miraval lawsuit, pushing back against Brad Pitt’s bid for her 2017 to 2019 tax and financial records. The filing centers on Chateau Miraval and the scope of financial discovery, with Jolie arguing Pitt is stretching her words to pry into older personal records.
Jolie’s filing says Pitt’s request rests on “continued mischaracterization and selective quoting,” and it draws a line between her stated “financial independence” from Pitt and any claim that she was generally in financial distress. She also says she already voluntarily gave Pitt tax returns for other years, making the push for older records an invasion of privacy.
Miraval records and disclosure
Pitt is seeking documents from 2017 to 2019, saying they matter because the case turns on whether Jolie had meaningful alternatives before selling her stake in Chateau Miraval to Stoli without his approval. His side argues that evidence of substantial income and other resources during that period would cut against Jolie’s claim that she had no realistic choice.
That request is not a side issue in the dispute. If the court accepts Pitt’s view, Jolie’s finances become part of the evidentiary record, and the fight over a sale of a winery stake expands into a deeper look at income, profit participation, and the paper trail around the transaction.
Competing versions of the sale
Jolie says “separating from one's ex-husband is categorically different from allegations that one is suffering from general financial distress.” Her lawyers also argue that “the real issue is not whether Angelina needed the money - the issue is that she was trying to untangle her life and her finances from her controlling and abusive ex-husband.”
Pitt’s lawyers answer that Jolie cannot claim he economically cornered one of Hollywood’s most successful actresses while refusing to produce the basic income and profit-participation documents needed to test that claim. They add that Jolie received approximately $33 million for Maleficent, which they say supports the demand for her financial records.
What Jolie has already given
Jolie says she has already handed over tax returns for other years and should not have to keep opening her finances further back in time. That leaves the court with a narrower question than the larger Miraval dispute: whether Pitt gets the 2017 to 2019 records he says are relevant, or whether Jolie’s earlier disclosures are enough.
My read is simple: Pitt is trying to turn a sale fight into a financial-discovery fight, and Jolie is trying to keep the case on the transaction itself. If the court accepts her privacy argument, the record stays tighter; if it accepts his relevance argument, her finances become a larger part of the Chateau Miraval case.
