A judge denies Brad Pitt's request for Angelina Jolie's 2017 to 2019 financial records.

A discovery order decides which papers change hands. It does not decide who wins the lawsuit. TMZ reported that a judge turned down Brad Pitt's request for Angelina Jolie's 2017-to-2019 financial records in the Château Miraval case because she is not offering that income as evidence, and left him room to renew the request if her testimony puts the income in issue. Paul Murphy's comments to TMZ, including his claim about an NDA and abuse, are the argument he chose to make. The Tuesday order did not adopt them.

TMZ reported Wednesday, Oct. 7, 2026, that a judge denied Brad Pitt's request for Angelina Jolie's financial records from 2017, 2018, and 2019. The request is part of the long fight over Château Miraval, the French winery the two have been litigating for years. The ruling was filed Tuesday. On TMZ's account, the judge found that Pitt's side had not shown good cause that would override Jolie's privacy interest in those records, because her side does not plan to offer evidence or argument about her income from those years. The same ruling says Pitt can ask again if Jolie's testimony puts that income in issue. A denial with a door left open is a ruling about relevance today. It is not a ruling that the records are harmless, damaging, or off limits no matter what she says later.

Civil discovery follows the issues a party actually tries. The side asking for documents has to show they matter to a claim or a defense, and personal financial records stay private unless that reason beats the privacy interest. The order TMZ described says Jolie's side has not put 2017-to-2019 income into the case, so Pitt lacks good cause for those years today. The exception is ordinary: if her testimony makes the income part of the case, he can come back for the papers behind it. Until then, the records stay with her. The order does not decide who controls Miraval or whether the sale was allowed.

The lawsuit, as TMZ described it, began after the sale. Jolie sold her interest in October 2021 to Tenute del Mondo, the wine arm of the Stoli Group. Pitt sued afterward, claiming the two had an agreement not to sell their stakes without consulting each other. That pleaded theory is about consent to a transfer. It is not, on its face, a claim about what Jolie earned two to four years before the sale. A lawyer defending a document demand would point the court at that gap: if her case does not rely on the income, the other side does not get a wider look at her finances just by asking. TMZ reported that it asked Pitt's side for comment and had not received one.

Jolie's lawyer used the win to describe the case in his words. Paul Murphy told TMZ this was a motion Pitt "never should've brought," and that Pitt does not need to invade her privacy to defend himself. Murphy said, "Mr. Pitt's unyielding demand for harassing information is just the latest manifestation of his attempts to control her and the narratives in this case." He said what Jolie wants is to untangle her personal and financial life from her ex-husband, and that rather than buy her out at an agreed price, Pitt tried at the last minute to use her exit from Miraval as leverage to force her to sign a nondisclosure agreement "to cover up his abuse of her and their children." Murphy said that is what the case is about, not her personal income from years before she sold. Those are a lawyer's sentences to a reporter. The Tuesday order did not find an NDA demand, did not find abuse, and did not decide the sale. It decided that these records do not have to be produced on the showing Pitt has made so far. TMZ's account of the order does not describe a criminal charge against either of them.