Brad Pitt filed a motion on March 17, 2026, asking a Los Angeles Superior Court judge to compel Russian billionaire Yuri Shefler to sit for a remote deposition in the $500 million Château Miraval winery dispute with Angelina Jolie. The motion escalates a years-long fight over whether Jolie lawfully sold her 50% stake in the French vineyard to Shefler's Stoli Group without Pitt's contractual consent, with a trial now set for February 2027.
Key Facts
| Detail | Summary |
|---|---|
| What happened | Brad Pitt filed a motion to compel Yuri Shefler to appear for a remote deposition |
| When | March 17, 2026 |
| Where | Los Angeles Superior Court, California |
| Who is affected | Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Yuri Shefler (Stoli Group chairman) |
| Amount at stake | $500 million (estimated Château Miraval valuation) |
| Trial date | February 2027 |
| Key legal issue | Whether Jolie's sale of her 50% stake violated a mutual consent agreement |
Why This Motion Matters Legally
Pitt's motion to compel Shefler's deposition is a standard but significant discovery tool under California Code of Civil Procedure § 2025.010, which grants parties the right to depose any person who has knowledge relevant to a pending lawsuit. The fact that Pitt is asking the court to intervene means Shefler has refused to appear voluntarily, forcing a judicial order under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2025.450, which allows courts to compel attendance and impose monetary sanctions for unjustified refusal.
According to TMZ's March 17 report, Pitt's legal team alleges Shefler "orchestrated" Jolie's sale of her Miraval stake to Stoli Group, the spirits conglomerate Shefler chairs. That allegation transforms Shefler from a passive buyer into someone with direct knowledge of how the transaction was structured, making his testimony highly relevant to whether the sale violated Pitt's contractual right of first refusal.
Shefler is resisting the deposition by citing his residency in Switzerland. California courts handle this through the Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad, but remote depositions have become increasingly routine since 2020. Under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2025.310(b), courts may order depositions to be conducted by telephone or other remote electronic means, which effectively neutralizes geographic objections when the deponent has already engaged in business transactions touching California.
The February 2027 trial date creates urgency. California courts generally require discovery to close 30 days before trial under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2024.020. With roughly 11 months until trial, Pitt's team is moving now to avoid being blocked from deposing a key witness if procedural delays eat into their discovery window.
How California Law Handles Asset Sales Between Divorcing Spouses
California is a community property state under Cal. Fam. Code § 760, meaning assets acquired during marriage are presumptively owned 50/50 by both spouses. Pitt and Jolie purchased Château Miraval in 2008 and married in 2014, so the winery's characterization as community or separate property depends on the specific financial arrangements they made.
The core legal question is whether Jolie had the right to sell her stake to a third party without Pitt's consent. California law under Cal. Fam. Code § 1100(b) generally prohibits one spouse from selling, conveying, or encumbering community real property without the other spouse's written consent. While Miraval is located in France, the business entity holding the ownership interest may be governed by California law if it was structured through a California-based LLC or partnership.
Pitt's team has reportedly argued that the couple had a mutual agreement requiring consent before either party could sell their interest. If such an agreement exists in writing, it functions as a contract enforceable under both California contract law and Cal. Fam. Code § 1620, which permits transmutation agreements between spouses when executed with specific formalities.
Jolie sold her 50% stake to Stoli Group's Tenute del Mondo subsidiary in October 2021 for a reported $67 million. Pitt's lawsuit, filed in February 2022 in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleges the sale was unauthorized and seeks damages that could reach into the hundreds of millions when accounting for the winery's full $500 million estimated valuation, lost business opportunities, and potential punitive damages.
Practical Takeaways for California Residents
-
Consent clauses matter in jointly owned businesses. If you and your spouse co-own a business or investment property, California law under Cal. Fam. Code § 1100 requires written consent for major transactions. Get any consent agreements in writing before a dispute arises, not after.
-
Discovery tools are powerful in California divorce-related litigation. Under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2025.010, you can depose any person with relevant knowledge, including third parties who bought assets from your spouse. Courts routinely compel reluctant witnesses to testify.
-
Remote depositions are now standard practice. Since 2020, California courts have embraced remote testimony under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2025.310(b). A witness living in Switzerland or anywhere else cannot simply refuse to appear by citing geography when remote options exist.
-
Discovery deadlines create real pressure. California's discovery cutoff of 30 days before trial under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2024.020 means failing to depose a key witness early enough can permanently bar that testimony. Start discovery early in high-asset disputes.
-
Third-party buyers can be dragged into divorce litigation. When a spouse sells a community asset to an outside party, that buyer becomes a potential witness and even a co-defendant. Shefler's involvement in this case illustrates how third-party purchasers cannot simply walk away from the transaction's legal consequences.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a California court force a foreign resident to sit for a deposition?
California courts can order remote depositions of foreign residents under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2025.310(b) when the witness has sufficient connection to the litigation. Courts have broad discretion to compel testimony via video or telephone, and a witness who has conducted business transactions affecting California property generally cannot avoid California jurisdiction by citing foreign residency alone.
What happens if Shefler refuses to comply with a court order to appear?
A witness who defies a California court order to appear for deposition faces sanctions under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2025.450, including monetary penalties and potential contempt findings. For a foreign resident, enforcement may require cooperation from Swiss courts, but the practical consequence is that the court may draw adverse inferences against the party who benefits from the witness's absence.
Can one spouse sell community property without the other's consent in California?
No. Cal. Fam. Code § 1100(b) explicitly prohibits one spouse from selling, leasing, or encumbering community real property without the written consent of the other spouse. A sale made without consent is voidable, meaning the non-consenting spouse can ask a court to unwind the transaction or award equivalent damages.
How much is Château Miraval actually worth?
Château Miraval's estimated valuation is approximately $500 million as of 2026, according to court filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court case. Jolie reportedly sold her 50% stake to Stoli Group's Tenute del Mondo for $67 million in October 2021, a figure Pitt's team has argued undervalued the property. The winery produces Miraval rosé, which generated over $50 million in annual revenue.
When will the Pitt-Jolie Miraval case go to trial?
The trial is currently scheduled for February 2027 in Los Angeles Superior Court. With California's discovery cutoff falling 30 days before trial under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2024.020, both sides must complete depositions and document production by approximately January 2027. The March 2026 deposition motion suggests pretrial discovery is intensifying.
If you are navigating a high-asset divorce or business ownership dispute in California, connecting with a qualified family law attorney early can help protect your interests. Use our California attorney directory to find exclusive divorce counsel in your county.
This article discusses recent news and provides general legal commentary. It does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Consult a qualified family law attorney for advice specific to your situation.