Angelina Jolie Calls Brad Pitt’s Winery Lawsuit ‘Part of a Problematic Pattern’ in New Court Filing

Angelina Jolie thinks ex Brad Pitt’s lawsuit over the winery they previously owned is “part of a problematic pattern.”

On Thursday, Jolie, 47, filed her case management statement after making a cross-complaint in October against Pitt, 58, who sued her in June for selling her interest in Château Miraval, the South of France vineyard and home they bought back in 2008. Pitt said they had agreed to never sell their respective interests in the family business without the other’s consent, an alleged agreement Jolie denies ever making.

“Ms. Jolie contends that Plaintiffs’ causes of action are frivolous, malicious and part of a problematic pattern, and she has filed a Cross-Complaint for declaratory relief seeking confirmation of her related rights,” read the new court filing.

“In particular, Plaintiff Pitt’s allegations that he and Ms. Jolie had a secret, unwritten, unspoken contract to a consent right on the sale of their interests in the property is directly contrary to the written record and, among other legal defects, violative of the Statute of Frauds and public policy,” Jolie’s team added.

Jolie requested a jury trial lasting 10 to 15 days. She also agreed to participate in a settlement conference or mediation session as a form of alternative dispute resolution. The document added that the court ordered both sides to “meet and confer over a unified discovery schedule” but they “have been unable to reach any agreement on such a schedule.”

In his case management statement from Nov. 23, Pitt accused Jolie of “refusing to produce any documents whatsoever in light of the pendency of her demurrer” and “trying to shield even the agreements concerning the purported sale at the heart of this dispute.” He also said he’s willing to do mediation or a settlement conference.

“Jolie and Nouvel were obligated not to sell interest in a private family home and wine business without Plaintiffs’ consent,” Pitt said in his filing. “They nevertheless did so, secretly, through a purported sale to Tenute del Mondo, an entity controlled by Russian oligarch Yuri Shetler. Defendants have since attempted a hostile takeover of the business. Plaintiffs seek specific performance unwinding the sale, a constructive trust, and other appropriate equitable relief or damages.”

Pitt and Jolie, who were declared legally single by a judge back in 2019, are parents to Maddox, 21, Pax, 19, Zahara, 17, Shiloh, 16, and 14-year-old twins Vivienne and Knox.

In his June lawsuit, Pitt accused Jolie of damaging the reputation of Château Miraval. Pitt’s legal team said Miraval became his “passion” project that grew “into a multimillion-dollar global business and one of the world’s most highly regarded producers of rosé wine” through his work, and Jolie contributed “nothing to Miraval’s success.”

“Jolie pursued and then consummated the purported sale in secret, purposely keeping Pitt in the dark, and knowingly violating Pitt’s contractual rights,” read the filing from Pitt’s team at the time.

Jolie’s former business Nouvel filed its own counter complaint in this case, accusing Pitt of “waging a vindictive war against” Jolie ever since she filed for divorce back in 2016 and “masterminded” a plan to “seize control” of the winery.

In Jolie’s October cross complaint — which contained serious allegations about the Sept. 14, 2016, private plane altercation that led to her divorce filing days later — lawyers wrote that Pitt’s claim is “false” and “no such agreement ever existed.” The filing also claimed that Jolie did offer to sell her portion to Pitt but he allegedly “demanded” she sign a non-disclosure agreement barring her from “speaking outside of court about Pitt’s physical and emotional abuse of her and their children.”

“Jolie refused to agree to such a provision, and Pitt walked away from the deal,” the lawyers said in the documents.

A source close to Pitt told PEOPLE in response to Jolie’s cross complaint: “It’s incredibly sad that she continues to rehash, revise and reimagine her description of an event that happened six years ago, adding in completely untrue information to try to get additional attention for herself at the expense of their family.”