It’s been five years of an ongoing custody battle between exes Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt and their six children. While it seemed that the pair might be closer to the end earlier this year with Brad regaining custody of their 5 minor children, the case has recently been blown open by Brad Pitt, who is challenging the court decision.
As many fans know, Angelina and ex-husband Brad Pitt share six children together:
20-year-old Maddox, 17-year-old Pax, 16-year-old Zahara, 15-year-old Shiloh, and 13-year-old twins Vivienne and Knox.
RELATED STORIES
Maddox is no longer considered a minor and therefore not involved in the custody battle.
At the time of the pair’s 2016 divorce, Angelina’s decision to file was reportedly because she was “extremely upset” with Brad’s parenting style.
Now, the ongoing legal battle continues with the latest legal manoeuvre coming from Brad.
According to documents filed in California Supreme Court and obtained by Page Six on Wednesday, the 57-year-old actor is arguing that his ex should not have gotten custody of the couple’s children due to an administrative error by a temporary judge whom they chose together.
Brad was first granted joint custody of the former couple’s five minor children in May by Judge John W. Ouderkirk.
However, a California appeals court disqualified Judge Ouderkirk because it was found that he did not disclose business relationships with Brad’s attorneys.
Judge Ouderkirk declined to disqualify himself from their divorce when Angelina asked him to in a 2020 court filing.
This comes after Ouderkirk’s long relationship with the family — even marrying the pair back in 2014. A lower court eventually ruled that Angelina’s request to remove the judge came too late. However, the actress later appealed that decision and won.
In this new filing, Brad’s lawyers are claiming that any error that Judge Ouderkirk may have made was a minor one, and not sufficient to undo his custody ruling.
“We are seeking review in the California Supreme Court because the temporary judge, who had been appointed and repeatedly renewed by both sides, was improperly disqualified after providing a detailed, fact-based custodial decision, following a lengthy legal process with multiple witnesses and experts,” Brad’s attorneys said in a statement .
“The lower court’s ruling will reward parties who are losing child custody cases, and condone their gamesmanship, by allowing them to wait and see about the likely direction of the case before seeking the disqualification of the judge,” the statement continued.
“Condoning the use of this type of strategic ‘lie in wait’ disqualification challenge will cause irreparable harm to both the children and families involved in this case, and other families in other cases, by unnecessarily prolonging the resolution of these disputes in an already overburdened court system.”
“Allowing this kind of crafty litigation strategy will deprive parents of irreplaceable time with their children as judges are disqualified for minor reasons in the midst of their cases.”
The statement concluded: “The lower court’s ruling is bad for children and bad for California’s overburdened judicial system.”
This divorce proceeding is ongoing.
h/t: Page Six
