When headlines say a judge has ordered a celebrity to hand over “private messages,” it sounds explosive. In legal terms, it is often far more routine. A recent ruling in Brad Pitt’s ongoing dispute with Angelina Jolie over their former French winery, Château Miraval, highlights how courts treat private communications, attorney–client privilege, and business records in high-stakes civil litigation.
The court decision does not determine who is right or wrong in the broader dispute. Instead, it turns on a narrower legal question: when are emails and text messages protected, and when must they be disclosed to the other side?
What you need to know
Summary: US courts can order parties in civil lawsuits to hand over private emails and text messages if they are relevant to the dispute and not legally privileged. Communications involving business decisions are often discoverable, even when lawyers are part of the broader conversation.
Why private messages are not always protected
Many people assume that anything discussed privately — especially when lawyers are involved — is automatically shielded from disclosure. That is not how US civil procedure works.
In lawsuits, both sides are entitled to request evidence that may be relevant to the claims or defences. This process, known as discovery, is deliberately broad. Emails, text messages, and internal discussions can all be subject to disclosure if they relate to the transaction or conduct being challenged in court.
In the Pitt–Jolie case, the dispute centres on the sale of Jolie’s stake in the winery. Messages discussing the terms, timing, or strategy behind that sale may be considered directly relevant, regardless of whether they were intended to remain private.
How attorney–client privilege actually works
Attorney–client privilege is one of the most misunderstood legal protections. It applies only to confidential communications between a client and their lawyer for the purpose of seeking or giving legal advice.
The protection does not automatically extend to:
-
business managers
-
publicists
-
financial advisers
-
friends or colleagues
If legal discussions are shared with non-lawyers, or mixed with business strategy and commercial negotiations, courts may rule that privilege does not apply. Even communications that follow or precede legal advice can be discoverable if they are primarily commercial in nature.
This is why judges often order the production of messages while still allowing truly legal advice to remain confidential.
Why judges order disclosure without deciding the case
It is important to separate discovery rulings from judgments on the merits. Ordering messages to be handed over does not mean a judge believes one party acted improperly. It simply reflects the court’s view that the material could be relevant to understanding what happened.
In high-value civil disputes, especially those involving business assets, courts routinely require extensive document production. The goal is transparency, not punishment.
What this means for celebrities — and everyone else
While celebrity cases attract attention, the legal principles are the same for ordinary litigants. Anyone involved in a business dispute should assume that emails and messages discussing key decisions may eventually be read by lawyers, judges, and opposing parties.
The Pitt–Jolie ruling serves as a reminder that privacy expectations often collide with legal reality once a lawsuit begins. Courts prioritise access to relevant evidence over personal discomfort or reputational concerns.
What happens next
The disclosure of messages is one step in a much longer legal process. It does not resolve the dispute, determine liability, or predict the final outcome. Instead, it shapes what evidence each side can rely on as the case moves forward.
For the public, the ruling may feel dramatic. For lawyers, it is a familiar example of how discovery works in complex civil litigation.
Frequently asked questions
Can courts really force people to hand over private texts?
Yes. If messages are relevant to a lawsuit and not legally privileged, courts can order them to be disclosed.
Does this mean attorney–client privilege is broken?
No. Genuine legal advice remains protected. The issue arises when communications mix legal advice with business or personal discussions involving non-lawyers.
Is this unusual in celebrity cases?
Not at all. High-profile cases follow the same procedural rules as any other civil dispute.
Does this ruling mean Brad Pitt has won the case?
No. It is a procedural decision about evidence, not a judgment on the underlying claims.
Editor’s note: This article explains general legal principles related to civil discovery and privilege. It does not make findings of fact beyond what has been publicly reported in court filings.
