Angelina Jolie source claims Brad Pitt aims to 'punish her for leaving' through winery dispute, Internet says 'give us a break'

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA: Two of Hollywood's greatest stars, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, used to be the talk of the town when they were together. However, there have been ongoing disputes and allegations since they split in 2016.

According to a source, Pitt is trying to "punish" Jolie by using the Chateau Miraval court action to force her to reveal her prior non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

The 'Salt' actress is reportedly required by the LA Superior Court to produce every NDA she signed with outside parties between 2014 and 2022.

Angelina Jolie's source claims Brad Pitt is using winery battle to 'punish' her

According to recent reports, Brad Pitt's legal team is aware that the actress' NDAs are unlikely to be accepted in light of the judge's latest decision requiring her to provide eight years' worth.

The 'Troy' actor has debated Jolie's authority to sell their house and vineyard in France. In 2021, she sold her $62 million stake to Russian billionaire Yuri Shefler. According to Pitt, the agreement breached their truce to offer the other the right of first refusal.

Now, a source close to Jolie claimed that Pitt is using this as a publicity gimmick and retaliation against her for leaving him.

A source close to Jolie, 48, told PEOPLE that, in light of a judge's recent ruling requiring the actress to provide eight years' worth of NDAs, Pitt, 60, "and his team know that these NDAs are never going to see the light of day at trial."

The source added: "This is all for the press. They also know that this will force Angelina to spend resources tracking all of this information down, which is just another way to drain her resources and punish her for leaving."

Rejecting the allegations, a Pitt source said, "The other side introduced the NDA issue into what is a straightforward business dispute, so it's ironic that they are now complaining about it."

"And they are the ones who were greatly enriched from violating the parties' agreement in selling the business," the source added.

According to records acquired by PEOPLE, Judge Lia Martin of the Los Angeles Superior Court ordered Jolie to "produce, within 60 calendar days of this Order, all non-privileged documents in her possession, custody or control that are responsive to" Pitt's petitions in a previously filed action.

Brad Pitt's legal quest for Angelina Jolie sparks split online views

Internet users took to X (formerly Twitter) to express their distinct opinions as one user slammed Pitt and defended Jolie by saying, "And it's TRUE, she filed for divorce and legally sold her part of the winery, he's the one suing her, smearing her, unable to let her go he wants to destroy her. Textbook abuser behavior."

A second one added, "Weird that the person who has had no less than 3 rships since the breakup would be the one allegedly still wanting to punish the other."

"Well yes, this is him misusing the legal system, it’s litigation abuse," exclaimed a third Jolie supporter.

Another one pointed out, "Common NDAs are simply not comparable to Mr Pitt’s last-second demand to try and cover up his personal misconduct" He set a bear trap for himself."

Several others came to lambast Jolie's action with one exclaiming, "Brad Pitt did let her go. He's been in a serious relationship for a while and one of there daughters lives with him now. It's her that will not let go !"

"Go and submit all the NDAs you forced others to sign while refusing to sign yours been given to you. Her hypocrisy is smelling real bad, nobody wants you, do the right thing and you wont feel miserable," seethed a second detractor.

Another one remarked, "She just can’t seem to move on," while one said, "It's the opposite...SHE can't stand the fact that he left her!" echoing a similar expression.

One user wrote in part, "Give me a break! AJs been filing motion after motion. When Disso queen Laura Wasser quits your case you need to look deep in yourself Angelina!"

This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.