A California appeal court on Friday underlies private judges used by Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt in their divorce case, handing Jolie a big victory.
The second District Appeal Court was agreed with Jolie that Judge John W.
Ougerkirk did not quite reveal business relations with Pitt’s lawyer.
“Ouderkirk’s ethical violation judge, who is considered along with information disclosed about his professional relationship recently with Pitt’s advisor, can cause objective people, aware of all facts, reasonable to entertain doubts about the ability of the judge to impartial.
Disqualification,” Court decide.
The decision means that detainees compete for five small children, which is almost over, can begin.
The judge has ruled divorced partners, but separated the problem of child detention.
Like many celebrity couples, Pitt and Jolie chose to hire their own judges to increase their privacy in the divorce process.
Ougerkirk refused to disqualify himself when Jolie asked him in submission in August.
The lower court judge decided that Jolie’s request for disqualification came late.
Jolie’s lawyer then appealed.
The oral argument of July 9 in front of the Court of Appeal focuses on which ethical regulations should be applied to private judges, which, such as overerkirk, usually a superior court judge pensions.
“If you will play the role of paid personal judges, you must play with the rules and rules very clearly, they need full transparency,” Jolie’s lawyer Robert Olson said.
“The things that should be disclosed are not disclosed.”
The panel questioned whether such settings must be permitted in California at all, but their decisions only apply to Ougerkirk.
Lawyers for both parties do not have a direct comment on the verdict.
Jolie, 46, and Pitt, 57, are among the most prominent Hollywood couples for 12 years.
They were married for two years when Jolie filed for divorce in 2016.
They were declared divorced in April 2019, after their lawyers asked for an assessment that allowed a married couple to be declared single while other problems and prisoners.
In May, Jolie and his denial criticized Ougerkirk because they did not allow paired children to testify in the process.
The actress also said the judge “has failed adequately considering” part of the California court code, which said it harms the best interests of children if custody is given to someone with the history of domestic violence.
The archiving did not provide details about what he called, but his lawyer submitted a document under the seal in March which was said to offer additional information.
The verdict does not discuss whether children must be allowed to testify in this case.