Angelina Jolie recounts “emotionally difficult” divorce and seeks $33,000 from Brad Pitt

09 October 2025

Pitt and Jolie married in 2014 but split by 2016. Their divorce was not finalized, however, until 2024. Getty Images

In a recent court declaration filed in Los Angeles, Angelina Jolie has opened a window into the emotional turmoil behind her divorce from Brad Pitt, describing the years following their separation as traumatic not only for herself but for their six children. The documents reveal that shortly after filing for divorce, Jolie relinquished control and occupancy of their homes in Los Angeles and at Château Miraval to Pitt without compensation, hoping that the goodwill gesture might ease tensions during what she calls a deeply difficult period.

Jolie writes that the split was not just legal but emotional, and that she and her children have not returned to Miraval because of its associations with “the painful events leading to the divorce.” She says that after the separation she focused on stability for her children, renting a home while seeking something more permanent, and that she declined work for roughly two years to care for them and help with their recovery from the upheaval.

Because she did not receive alimony or other financial support from Pitt, Jolie claims she was forced into debt and in need of liquidity. She says her savings were tied up in Miraval at the time, and she ultimately sold her stake something Pitt has contested in court, alleging she breached agreements by doing so without his approval. According to Jolie, her decision was born of necessity.

The recently filed motion is in response to a demand from Pitt that Jolie turn over private messages. Jolie’s legal team argues this request is irrelevant to their commercial dispute over Miraval and insists she repeatedly asked him to withdraw the motion. After he refused, she is now asking the court to require him to reimburse her $33,000 in legal fees she incurred in opposing it.

The ongoing battle over Château Miraval is emblematic of how their divorce and post-divorce dynamics remain deeply entangled in both legal and emotional conflict. For Jolie the property is not just a vineyard but a vessel of memories: she notes that they were married there, that she spent part of her pregnancy there, and that the twins were brought home there from the hospital. The separation from it, she asserts, carries weight.

Critics of the filing see it as part of a broader legal and rhetorical strategy. A source familiar with Pitt’s team told Page Six that the dispute is “strictly business” and that Jolie’s presentation is intended more to bring public sympathy to her side than to affect the legal issues being argued.

Still, Jolie’s depiction underscores how public relationships even after they break continue to carry tremendous personal and cultural resonance. Her documents are more than legal pleading: they are a narrative about loss, memory, identity, and the challenges of dividing not only assets but personal history when life has been lived in the spotlight.