Chris Pratt has found himself thrust into a legal dispute between Katy Perry and the Wescott family over the singer’s $15 million Montecito mansion. The long-running feud, which began in 2020, has seen Perry’s business manager, Bernie Gudvi, involved in the purchase of the Santa Barbara-area property. The Wescott family, led by Carl Westcott—a U.S. Army veteran and founder of 1-800-Flowers—has been seeking to rescind the contract after claiming that he lacked the capacity to sign the transaction due to a recent surgery and brain disorder.
The case has taken an unexpected turn with the involvement of Pratt, who has been renting and living in the Montecito home with his wife, Katherine Schwarzenegger, and their children. The Wescott family has requested that the judge question Pratt about the condition of the home and any issues with his lease agreement with Perry. According to court documents obtained by Fox News Digital, the family has sought to subpoena Pratt, arguing that he is a material witness in the case.
Katy Perry’s legal team, represented by attorney Christopher C. Melcher, is seeking damages for structural defects, deferred maintenance, and lost rental income. Melcher has argued that the condition of the home when Pratt was a tenant is not relevant to its state when Perry first took possession. However, the Wescott family contends that the property was in good condition, as evidenced by its ability to be rented out to a high-profile tenant like Pratt.
The trial, which began last year and was split into two parts, is now entering its damages phase, with Perry set to testify this month. The legal battle has drawn attention to the complexities of property ownership and the role of celebrities in high-stakes real estate transactions. As Perry prepares to take the stand, the outcome of the case could have significant implications for both parties, reflecting the broader legal challenges of modern celebrity and property disputes.
Orlando Bloom, Perry’s ex, has also been named as a witness in the case. Bloom, who split from Perry earlier this year, was served a subpoena and included on the joint witness list. However, the judge has questioned the necessity of his testimony, suggesting that it may not be beneficial to the case, as it could turn it into a celebrity circus. The legal battle continues to draw public interest, highlighting the intersection of celebrity, legal disputes, and the financial implications of high-profile property transactions.