Angelina Jolie must produce 8 years of NDAs in Brad Pitt winery lawsuit

A judge added a new wrinkle to the legal dispute between Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.

In a ruling on Thursday, May 16, Judge Lia Martin ordered the Tomb Raider actress to produce every non-disclosure agreement (NDA) she created or agreed to from 2014 to 2022.

NDAs have become a key point of conflict in the lawsuit, which Pitt initially filed after claiming that Jolie sold her half of their joint winery Château Miraval to Russian billionaire Yuri Shefler after previously agreeing to sell it to Pitt, who owns the other 50% of the business. Jolie’s team asserts that she backed out of her agreement with Pitt, whom she divorced in 2019, after her ex-husband’s team requested she sign an NDA as part of the sale deal.

A source close to Pitt’s legal team told Entertainment Weekly that Jolie “has suffered a crushing blow” with the ruling that “could potentially undermine her central defense.”

Jolie’s team described Pitt’s proposed agreement as “a greatly expanded NDA now covering Pitt’s personal misconduct, whether related to Miraval or not” in a filing, whereas Pitt’s team argued that the agreement was “to protect the reputation of the Miraval brand,” according to a document reviewed by Entertainment Weekly. Jolie’s side then characterized the inclusion of the agreement as “controlling and punishing” and “unconscionable” because it would limit her ability to speak out about Pitt’s alleged abuse of her and their children. One of Jolie’s filings claimed that Pitt’s abuse began “well before” the September 2016 flight where he allegedly physically abused their children, which prompted an FBI investigation.

Jolie’s attorneys argued that the actress “unwaveringly protected their children by voluntarily refraining from publicly discussing any of the details of Pitt’s abuse, and his response was to now try to impose that silence forever.”

The Changeling actress will now have to turn over eight years of NDAs after Pitt’s team argued that these documents would prove that Pitt’s proposed NDA for the winery deal was not “unconscionable,” as Jolie’s own agreements will cover a similar scope. This is seemingly part of an attempted strategy to undermine the NDA as a legitimate deal-breaker in the ex-couple’s sale agreement.

“Common NDAs are simply not comparable to Mr. Pitt’s last-second demand to try and cover up his personal misconduct,” Jolie’s lawyer Paul Murphy told EW via statement. He continued, “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. 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.”