On May 28, a Michigan court ordered attorney Paul Culyba to sit for a continued deposition in the ongoing litigation between actor Brad Pitt and his ex‑wife Angelina Jolie over the Château Miraval winery in France.. The ruling overtturns a prior instruction that had barred Culyba from answering 33 questions, marking a tactical win for Pitt as he challenges Jolie’s alleged sale of her stake without his consent.

Michigan judge orders continued deposition of Paul Culyba

The judge specified that Culyba must answer the queries listed on pages three through six of Pitt’s motion, plus reasonable follow‑up questions, for up to one hour in person. As the court noted, the earlier block on testimony was “improper guidance” from Stoli Group’s lawyers, according to the ruling. this decision reopens a line of inquiry that could illuminate how the sale was structured and whether contractual consent was bypassed.

Pitt alleges Jolie sold Miraval stake to Stoli subsidiary without consent

Pitt contends that Jolie secretly transferred her share of Château Miraval to a subsidiary of the Stoli Group, a global premium‑spirits company, in breach of an alleged agreement that required mutual approval for any sale. the actor, 62, maintains that the couple had agreed neither could dispose of their interest without the other’s sign‑off, a claim that now faces scrutiny under the newly permitted questioning of Culyba.

Tenute del Mondo countersues Pitt and Mondo Bongo

Complicating the dispute, Tenute del Mondo – the entity Jolie reportedly sought to sell her shares to – filed a countersuit against Pitt and his production firm Mondo Bongo. The filing adds another layer of legal entanglement, suggesting that the business ramifications extend beyond the personal split and could affect the valuation and future control of the winery.

Attorney‑client privilege battle over Jolie’s emails

In a related front, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied Pitt’s attempt to overturn Jolie’s claim of attorney‑client privilege over private emails tied to the case. While the court granted Pitt’s motion to compel discovery of certain communications, it upheld the privilege on other grounds, leaving a swath of potentially critical correspondence out of reach.

Who will ultimately decide the validity of the alleged sale agreement?

The key unanswered issue is whether a court will find that the alleged agreement requiring joint consent was enforceable and, if so, whether Jolie’s sale violated it. Additionally, the outcome of Tenute del Mondo’s countersuit and the scope of the privileged emails remain uncertain, leaving both parties with significant legal hurdles ahead.