Katy Perry Blocks Orlando Bloom from Testifying in Court Battle.
Katy Perry's legal team has filed a motion to prevent her fiancé, Orlando Bloom, from being compelled to testify in a court battle involving the pop star and an 85-year-old disabled veteran, it has been revealed.
The motion, filed on Wednesday, January 22, seeks a ruling from an L.A. judge that Orlando, 48, should not be required to appear at the upcoming trial, which is set for February 25, despite being served a subpoena.
The dispute traces back to 2020, when disabled veteran Carl Westcott sued Katy’s business manager, Bernie Gudvi. Westcott, 85, who is credited with founding 1-800-Flowers, claimed he had agreed to sell his Santa Barbara mansion to Bernie, who was representing Katy, for $15 million.
Westcott asserts that he was heavily medicated following back surgery when the deal was struck, and once the medication wore off, he realised he had made an error in judgement. He called Katy’s team in an attempt to cancel the sale. However, Westcott alleges that Katy’s team refused to back down from the agreement. His lawsuit asks the court to deem the sale unenforceable.
The first phase of the trial took place in November 2023. Following this, the court ruled that the sale was valid and instructed Westcott to hand over the keys to Katy. However, the court also scheduled a second phase of the trial, in which Katy is set to testify regarding alleged damages she claims to have suffered.
In a new development, Carl Westcott’s legal team served Orlando Bloom with a subpoena in November 2023, demanding that he testify. Sources close to the Westcott family suggest that Orlando may have pertinent information, alleging that he had been involved in the process with Katy.
However, in the recently filed motion, Katy’s business manager, Bernie Gudvi, and his lawyers have strongly opposed Orlando's inclusion in the case. The motion argues, “Mr. Bloom has no knowledge remotely bearing on the facts of this case. He does not know what compensation is owed to [Bernie] for specific performance of the July 2020 real property sale contract, what damage to the property had occurred before [Bernie] took ownership last year, or how to estimate and assess the cost of those damages.”
Bernie’s lawyer further stated, “Indeed, all those areas are the appropriate subject of expert testimony from some of the nineteen licensed contractors and sub-contractors who inspected the property. Neither [Carl] nor the Court needs percipient testimony from [Katy’s] partner, who has no conceivable knowledge of facts relating to this damages phase and who has no special expertise in assessing the condition of real property, especially prior to the transfer of title to [Bernie].”
The lawyer added, “Aware that [Orlando] has no relevant evidence, [Carl] did not even ask for his deposition during discovery and sought no documents or information from him. The only alleged reason for the subpoena purportedly is his being a witness to ‘the scope of repairs and to the scope of all other work being done or contemplated at the house.’” The lawyer continued, “But, [Carl] has cited no evidence to support that statement, and the sole basis is that the Westcott family’s house manager, Russell Dustman, said that [Orlando] had visited the property and told him (as inadmissible hearsay) that he would be making unspecified decisions about the property. That same house manager later conceded that what he knew about [Katy’s] and [Orlando’s] plans for the property was known '[o]nly through rumours.'”
The motion concluded by stating, “It was one thing to seek testimony from [Katy] despite her limited knowledge of relevant facts in the damages phase; it is another to drag into these proceedings [Orlando], who has no demonstrated knowledge of any relevant facts and was not the subject of any discovery. [Katy’s] family should be off-limits.”
A judge has yet to rule on the motion.
