Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have already spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars," maybe even millions on their divorce. But they could very well spend more depending on how things go in court. While Jolie received positive news on her end regarding their case, it could mean the two will have to start from scratch. Divorce attorney, Mark Vincent Kaplan, who has represented celebrities like Paula Abdul, Charlie Sheen and Kevin Federline, gave his expert advice to Us Weekly on what could possibly happen in Pitt and Jolie's case, although he is not representing them, estimating that they've already spent quite a bit, maybe even "millions" on litigation.
"And it could be more if they start over again," Kaplan told the outlet. "Nothing is more expensive than a hotly contested custody [dispute]. I'm sure both of these people can afford to [keeping litigating], which is not the reason to do it, but that's probably not going to be a major factor for either of them given their respective wealth." Jolie received a huge win recently after it was announced on July 23 that her petition to have Judge John Ouderkirk removed the their custody case was granted. The state of California made the ruling on the basis that the judge had failed his ethical duty by not revealing his ongoing cases that involved Pitt's attorneys in a timely manner.
"The case has been sent back to the Los Angeles Superior Court," one source told the outlet. "Judge Ouderkirk is no longer involved and Angelina is grateful to seek a fair decision regarding custody for the children." Pitt and Jolie share six children together: Maddox, 19; Pax, 17; Zahara, 16; Shiloh, 15; Knox, 13, and Vivienne, 13. Since they will be starting over with a new judge, this means their entire case and custody arrangement could start over again too, meaning more money out of their pockets. Although it was a win for Jolie, Kaplan says she still has an "uphill battle" to deal with.
"She's still got an uphill battle because now there is a historical observation rather than future projection [of how the children are doing]," he noted. A spokesperson for Pitt said, "The appeals court ruling was based on a technical procedural issue. The facts haven't changed. There is an extraordinary amount of factual evidence which led the judge — and the many experts who testified — to reach their clear conclusion about what is in the children's best interests. We will continue to do what's necessary legally based on the detailed findings of what's best for the children."