Katy Perry Fighting Orlando Bloom From Testifying in Court Battle With 85-Year-Old Veteran

Katy Perry’s team demanded her fiancé Orlando Bloom not be forced to testify at the upcoming trial involving the pop star and a disabled veteran, In Touch can exclusively report.

A motion, obtained by In Touch, was filed on Wednesday, January 22, asking an L.A. judge to rule Orlando, 48, does not have to appear upcoming trial scheduled for February 25, despite being served a subpoena.

The legal drama started in 2020 when disabled veteran Carl Westcott sued Katy’s business manager, Bernie Gudvi. Carl, 85, who invented 1-800-Flowers, said he had agreed to sell his Santa Barbara, California, mansion to Bernie, who was representing Katy in the deal, for $15 million.

Carl claimed he was heavily medicated following a back surgery when he hashed out the agreement.

He said once the medication wore off, he realized he had made a mistake and called Katy’s team to cancel the deal.

However, Carl claimed Katy’s team refused to back down from the deal. Carl’s lawsuit asked the court to find the sale was unenforceable.

The first phase of the trial went down in November 2023.

The court ruled that the deal was valid and ordered Carl to turn over the keys to Katy. However, the court set a phase two of the trial.

At phase two, Katy is set to testify about alleged damages she suffered.

As In Touch first reported, back in November, Carl’s legal team fired off a subpoena to Orlando demanding he testify.

Sources close to the Westcott family tell In Touch that they believe Orlando has relevant information and claimed he had been involved in the process with Katy.

However, in the newly filed motion, Katy’s business manager Bernie and his lawyers opposed Orlando from taking the stand.

The motion read, “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 said, “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].”

Bernie’s lawyer continued, “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 added, “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 rumors.”

Bernie’s lawyer continued, “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 request.