Show summary Hide summary
- Judge orders depositions of Stoli Group figures in Miraval fight
- Why Pitt’s lawyers say these witnesses matter
- Stoli’s resistance and Swiss jurisdiction claims
- Responses from both camps and competing narratives
- Earlier rulings that shaped discovery
- Key dates and actions in the Miraval litigation
- How this affects ownership and distribution questions
- Family dynamics and the broader personal fallout
- Procedural paths left to travel toward trial
Brad Pitt has won a fresh legal skirmish in the long-running dispute with Angelina Jolie over their French winery, Château Miraval, as a California judge ordered members of the Stoli Group to submit to depositions. The move forces new witnesses into the spotlight and ramps up scrutiny of the 2021 sale that ignited the high-stakes lawsuit.
Judge orders depositions of Stoli Group figures in Miraval fight
On June 17, a Superior Court in California granted a motion from Brad Pitt’s attorneys. The order compels depositions of people tied to the Stoli Group and its wine arm, Tenute del Mondo.
Sophia Laforteza of Katseye announces hiatus: comes months after Manon Bannerman’s exit
Delta to return to Tokyo Narita hub in 2027: 7-year comeback
The court’s action aims to uncover details about the 2021 transaction in which Angelina Jolie sold her stake in Miraval to Tenute del Mondo. Pitt’s team says investors there hold firsthand information.
Who the depositions target
- Executives and representatives of the Stoli Group and Tenute del Mondo.
- Alexey Oliynik — identified in filings as a key executive Pitt sought to depose.
- Former in-house counsel tied to prior testimony, whose answers were previously limited.
Why Pitt’s lawyers say these witnesses matter
Pitt’s lawyers argue the Stoli parties can shed light on the 2021 sale and distribution agreements. They assert the buyers had knowledge that affects claims about consent and control over the estate’s wine business.
Pitt contends that the sale breached an agreement between the ex-spouses that required mutual approval before transferring ownership.
Stoli’s resistance and Swiss jurisdiction claims
Documents show efforts to depose Alexey Oliynik began in June 2025. He reportedly refused to produce documents or appear.
Stoli-related parties have relied on objections tied to residency and jurisdiction. Oliynik claimed Swiss residency prevents compelled testimony in California, according to filings.
After the June 17 order, lawyers for Pitt said the Stoli affiliates “will now have to face the music.”
Responses from both camps and competing narratives
Sources close to the matter offer sharply different takes on motive and conduct.
- One insider defended Jolie’s sale, saying she chose Stoli as a global distribution partner to expand Miraval for the benefit of the family.
- Another source accused Pitt of resisting the deal out of pride and a desire to control the brand.
Jolie’s lawyer emphasized that this procedural ruling does not decide the case’s merits. He said Jolie is focused on prevailing at trial next year so the family can move forward.
Earlier rulings that shaped discovery
The case has seen several pivotal discovery fights across jurisdictions. In one recent episode, a Michigan court found attorneys for the Stoli Group improperly instructed a former in-house lawyer not to answer dozens of deposition questions.
The judge ordered the former Stoli general counsel, Todd Culyba, to return for further testimony and to answer the previously blocked questions.
That ruling forced the Stoli side to allow more probing about the 2021 sale and related communications.
Privacy and privilege battles
Separately, Jolie won a motion denying Pitt access to certain private emails tied to Miraval. A Los Angeles judge ruled Pitt had not carried the burden to overcome attorney-client privilege.
The denial was entered “without prejudice,” so the issue could be raised again later. The exchange highlights how claims of privilege and confidentiality play a major role in the case.
Key dates and actions in the Miraval litigation
- 2008 — Pitt and Jolie purchase Château Miraval.
- 2016 — Jolie files for divorce, fracturing the partnership.
- 2021 — Jolie sells her stake in the vineyard to Tenute del Mondo (Stoli’s wine arm).
- 2022 — Pitt sues, alleging the sale breached an agreement requiring mutual consent.
- December 2024 — Pitt’s divorce from Jolie is finalized.
- June 2025 — Pitt moves to depose Alexey Oliynik; Stoli resists.
- June 17 (court date) — California judge orders depositions of Stoli affiliates.
How this affects ownership and distribution questions
The dispute is not only about who owns what. It also examines how Miraval would be marketed and distributed worldwide.
Legal teams are probing:
- What distribution deals were promised or discussed.
- Whether the buyers intended to grow the brand or change its trajectory.
- What approvals, if any, were required by the partners before a sale.
Control and brand stewardship remain central issues in both factual claims and emotional tensions.
Family dynamics and the broader personal fallout
The winery case sits amid a long, public divorce and custody saga. The couple share six children, with reports of strained family relationships.
Pitt’s suit and Jolie’s counterclaims have included allegations about motives and conduct during the marriage and afterward. Each legal maneuver feeds media scrutiny and private strain.
Procedural paths left to travel toward trial
With the court now ordering more depositions, discovery will widen. Additional testimony may reveal details about the transaction and the parties’ intent.
Upcoming steps likely include:
- Further depositions of Stoli employees and executives.
- Additional motions over privilege and admissibility of documents.
- Pretrial hearings to set deadlines and trial dates.
The case remains active in multiple courts and could see more cross-jurisdictional skirmishes as parties test limits of discovery and privilege.
