Katy Perry Lawsuit, Pop Star Wins $1.8M Against Dying Veteran In Shocking Real Estate Case—Court Just Ruled On $15M Montecito Mansion War

What Is the Katy Perry Lawsuit About?

Pop star Katy Perry is set to receive $1.8 million from 86-year-old Carl Westcott, a disabled Texas millionaire, in a five-year real estate battle over a $15 million Montecito mansion. The judge signed a proposed order on November 26, 2025, awarding Perry these damages after she accused Westcott of derailing her plans by trying to back out of their 2020 agreement just days after signing it.

Here’s what happened: In July 2020, Perry and her then-partner Orlando Bloom purchased an eight-bedroom estate from Westcott. Within days, Westcott attempted to back out of the deal, claiming he didn’t have the mental capacity to sign the contract because he was on pain medication following back surgery. He sued to reverse the sale, but lost. Perry then countersued for damages, initially seeking $4.7 million.

Current Status: A judge signed a proposed order Tuesday that will award Perry the $1.8 million so long as neither party files a viable objection in the next ten days. Westcott, now 85, is currently in hospice care receiving around-the-clock treatment, making this one of the most controversial celebrity lawsuits in recent memory.

The Shocking Twist: A $15 Million Deal Gone Wrong

Picture this: You’re an 85-year-old disabled veteran recovering from major surgery. A pop superstar makes you an offer you can’t refuse on your dream retirement home. Days later, you realize something went horribly wrong—but it’s too late. This isn’t a movie plot. It’s the real story behind the Katy Perry lawsuit that’s dividing America.

The battle over the luxury property started soon after Westcott signed the sales contract with Perry in July 2020. Within weeks, the 1-800-Flowers founder claimed he was suffering from multiple conditions that impaired his judgment: a degenerative brain disease, dementia symptoms, post-operative delirium, and the effects of heavy painkillers from a six-hour back surgery he’d undergone just days before signing.

What makes this case extraordinary? The property wasn’t just any mansion—it’s a sprawling 9,285-square-foot estate on 2.5 acres with ocean views, eight bedrooms, 11 bathrooms, an infinity pool, and a three-bedroom guesthouse. Westcott had purchased it in May 2020 for $11.25 million, intending to live there for the rest of his life. By July, Perry offered $15 million—a substantial profit—but Westcott’s family claims the timing couldn’t have been worse.

Timeline of the Katy Perry Lawsuit: How It All Unfolded

July 2020: The Sale That Started It All

July 10, 2020: Westcott underwent a six-hour back surgery
July 14, 2020: Perry’s $15 million offer contract was dated and signed
Days later: Westcott attempted to rescind the contract, claiming incapacity

2020-2023: The Legal Battle Begins

August 2020: Westcott filed a lawsuit against Perry’s business manager, Bernie Gudvi
2015: Westcott had been diagnosed with Huntington’s Disease
November 2023: A judge at the Los Angeles Superior Court declared that Westcott was of sound mind when he agreed to the sale

2024: Perry Gains Control

May 2024: The judge ruled decisively in Perry’s favor, finding “no persuasive evidence” that Westcott was mentally impaired when he agreed to the deal
May 17, 2024: Perry had the deed to the contested property filed, according to property records obtained by The Wall Street Journal
April 2024: Perry placed $9 million in escrow and took control of the property

November 2025: The Damages Phase

November 21, 2025: Court documents show Perry claims a total of $4,718,698.95, covering lost rental income and repair costs
November 26, 2025: Judge signs order awarding Perry $1.8 million in final damages

Katy Perry Lawsuit, Pop Star Wins $1.8M Against Dying Veteran in Shocking Real Estate Case—Court Just Ruled on $15M Montecito Mansion War

The Legal Battle: Mental Capacity vs. Contract Law

The heart of this lawsuit hinges on one critical legal principle: contractual capacity. Under California law, a person must have the mental ability to understand what they’re signing for a contract to be valid.

What the Law Says About Mental Capacity

Contract law requires that parties entering an agreement must possess “legal capacity”—meaning they understand the nature and consequences of the transaction. Texas law presumes that a person executing a contract had sufficient mental capacity at the time of its execution to understand his legal rights, and California follows similar principles.

The burden of proof rests on the person claiming incapacity. They must demonstrate they lacked the mental ability to comprehend the agreement at the time of signing.

The Court’s Ruling on Westcott’s Capacity

In his 2023 ruling siding with Perry, the judge noted that Westcott’s own medical expert failed to “offer a cogent explanation” that would allow the court to find Westcott “lacked competence” to sign the sales contract.

The court evaluated:

Westcott’s behavior during negotiations
Medical evidence of his condition
Testimony from witnesses who interacted with him
The complexity of negotiations he engaged in over several weeks

Key Finding: In May 2024, the court ruled Westcott met that standard of mental competency, clearing the way for Perry’s ownership.

Why This Case Matters for Real Estate Law

Legal experts note this case demonstrates how courts evaluate mental capacity claims:

Timing is everything: Courts look at capacity at the moment of signing
Medical evidence must be specific: General diagnoses aren’t enough
Buyer behavior matters: Westcott’s lawyer pointed out that after Perry took control of the house, she rented it to actor Chris Pratt and his wife, Katherine Schwarzenegger, arguing the house must have been in good condition
Sophisticated parties face higher scrutiny: Westcott was the founder of 1-800-Flowers, not a vulnerable senior with no business experience

The Damages Battle: How Much Money Is Really at Stake?

Perry initially asked for nearly $5 million in damages. Here’s the breakdown:

Perry’s Original Claims:

$3.5 million: Lost rental income during the four-year legal battle
$1.3 million: Repair costs for flood damage and a fallen tree
Total requested: $4.7 million (after offsets)

Westcott’s Counter-Argument:

$260,000: The amount Westcott’s team argued Perry’s damages should be limited to
Claimed Perry could have invested the money elsewhere
Argued repair estimates, not actual receipts, weren’t sufficient evidence

The Judge’s Final Ruling (November 2025):

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Joseph Lipner found a middle ground. He said Perry deserved $2.8 million for lost rental value while the property was in limbo, and $260,000 for repairs. However, he then deducted $1 million because Perry was able to invest her money elsewhere during the fight, and because Westcott lost interest on that amount.

Final Award: $1.8 million

This means Perry now owes approximately $4.2 million on the remaining balance of the $15 million purchase price, having already paid $9 million into escrow.

Public Opinion: David vs. Goliath?

This lawsuit has sparked fierce debate across social media and legal circles. Here’s why people are divided:

The Case Against Perry

“The optics of a millionaire pop star demanding hefty damages from a very ill man are terrible,” Abesi Manyando, a PR strategist based in the US told The Telegraph. “This isn’t just a lawsuit, it’s now a David and Goliath narrative – a global superstar with wealth, legal resources and leverage versus an elderly, declining veteran who already lost his home.”

Social media reaction has been brutal:

Critics point out Perry’s recent controversial space trip with Jeff Bezos
Westcott’s son has said the case has strained his father’s health. He adds that an apology from Perry would be welcome
Perry’s breakup with Orlando Bloom in June 2025 added more tabloid fuel to the fire

The Case For Perry

However, legal observers note:

Westcott is not a vulnerable senior—he’s the successful founder of 1-800-Flowers
Perry’s lawyer also claimed Westcott courted another offer from Maria Shriver, suggesting he was negotiating with multiple parties
Perry followed all legal procedures and won at every stage
Contract law exists to protect valid agreements

As one social media user argued: “How does his age, disability status, or whether he’s on hospice matter? He tried backing out of a real estate sale, there are protections and laws around this.”

The “PERRY Act”: How This Lawsuit Inspired New Legislation

The controversy surrounding this case became so intense that it sparked proposed legislation to protect elderly homeowners.

Westcott supporters proposed legislation called the PERRY Act, which is not just the singer’s last name but also stands for Protecting Elder Realty for Retirement Years.

What the PERRY Act Would Do:

The proposed act aims to:

Protect senior citizens against real estate transactions that target older individuals whose mental capacities may be compromised
Require additional safeguards for property sales involving elderly sellers
Establish cooling-off periods for major real estate transactions by seniors

At the time, in 2023, the site stated that there were “currently no laws to protect senior citizens against real estate transactions that unfairly target older individuals whose mental capacities may be compromised at the time of sale.”

The PERRY Act website highlighted alarming statistics:

“The Federal Trade Commission also reported that in 2020, individuals aged 60 and older filed over 93,000 complaints related to fraud, with reported losses exceeding $500 million”
“Additionally, the rate of cognitive impairment and/or dementia are 15% by age 75 and 20% by age 80.”

Current Status: While the PERRY Act has generated significant attention, it has not yet been enacted into law.

Perry’s Troubled History with Real Estate Lawsuits

This isn’t the first time Katy Perry has found herself in a controversial real estate battle involving elderly homeowners. In fact, her previous lawsuit had a tragic ending.

The 2018 Convent Lawsuit: A Death in Court

Sister Catherine Rose Holzman, who had battled Perry and the Archdiocese of Los Angeles over a property sale, was in court for a post-judgment hearing when tragedy struck. Sister Catherine Rose Holzman, 89, collapsed and died during legal proceedings over a hillside convent in Los Feliz worth millions.

What happened:

Perry wanted to buy an 8-acre former convent in Los Angeles for $14.5 million
Two elderly nuns opposed the sale, claiming they had already sold it to restaurateur Dana Hollister for $15.5 million
A judge ruled the nuns’ sale was invalid, clearing the way for Perry’s purchase
“To Katy Perry, please stop. It’s not doing anyone any good except hurting a lot of people,” Holzman, 89, had earlier told KTTV as she entered the courthouse
Minutes later, she collapsed and died

The remaining nun, Sister Rita Callanan, later told the New York Post: “I really didn’t like Katy Perry. I’m sure she doesn’t like me,” adding that Perry has “blood on her hands” as a result of the sale.

The legal aftermath: Despite winning the case, it’s unclear if Perry ever completed the purchase of the convent. The property’s fate remains disputed, and the tragic death brought significant negative publicity to the pop star.

What You Need to Know: Key Takeaways from the Katy Perry Lawsuit

For Property Buyers:

Document everything: Ensure clear evidence of the seller’s capacity
Use witnesses: Have disinterested parties present during crucial negotiations
Get medical evaluations: If capacity is a concern, obtain professional assessments before closing
Follow proper procedures: Courts reward buyers who act in good faith

For Property Sellers:

Timing matters: Avoid major transactions immediately after surgery or during illness
Get independent advice: Consult your own attorney before signing
Know your rights: Mental incapacity can void a contract, but you must prove it
Act quickly: If you believe you lacked capacity, seek legal help immediately

For Legal Professionals:

Capacity challenges are hard to win: The burden of proof is high
Medical experts must be specific: General diagnoses won’t suffice
Sophisticated parties face skepticism: Courts are less sympathetic to business owners
Damages calculations matter: Even if you win on liability, damages disputes can reduce recovery

Frequently Asked Questions About the Katy Perry Lawsuit

Is the Katy Perry lawsuit still ongoing in 2025?

The liability phase is over—Perry won ownership. A judge signed a proposed order Tuesday that will award Perry the $1.8 million so long as neither party files a viable objection in the next ten days. The case should be fully resolved by early December 2025 unless Westcott files an appeal.

How much did Katy Perry pay for the Montecito mansion?

Perry originally agreed to pay $15 million for the property. After Perry prevailed, she placed $9 million in escrow and took control of the property in April 2024, leaving the remaining $6 million of the purchase price unpaid pending the outcome of the damages phase. With the $1.8 million damages award, she’ll pay approximately $4.2 million more.

Did Carl Westcott have dementia when he sold his house?

No. In May 2024, a judge ruled decisively in Perry’s favor, finding “no persuasive evidence” that Westcott was mentally impaired when he agreed to the deal. While Westcott was diagnosed with Huntington’s Disease in 2015 and claimed post-operative delirium, the court found insufficient evidence of incapacity at the time of signing.

Why did Katy Perry sue Carl Westcott?

Perry didn’t sue Westcott first—he sued her business manager to reverse the sale. Perry then countersued for damages, claiming she was “entitled to $3,525,000 in rental value” she says was lost due to the dispute and an additional $1,343,401.95 for necessary repairs.

Is Katy Perry still with Orlando Bloom?

No. Perry and Bloom ended their nine-year relationship and six-year engagement in June 2025. They remain focused on co-parenting their daughter, Daisy.

What is Carl Westcott’s current condition?

Westcott, an 85-year-old veteran now in hospice care, has escalated again, with the pop star seeking nearly $5 million in damages tied to a Montecito estate. His sons have stated the legal battle has taken a toll on his health.

Can someone back out of a real estate contract due to medication?

It depends. Being on medication doesn’t automatically void a contract. Courts look at whether the medication impaired the person’s ability to understand the nature and consequences of the transaction at the time of signing. In this case, the judge found Westcott’s evidence insufficient to prove incapacity.

What happens if someone signs a contract without mental capacity?

If proven, the contract can be declared void or voidable. However, the burden rests on the person seeking to set aside a contract to show the lack of mental capacity of the contracting party at the time the contract was made. This is difficult to prove, especially after the fact.

Did Chris Pratt rent the Katy Perry mansion?

Yes. Westcott’s lawyer said that after Perry took control of the house, she rented it to actor Chris Pratt and his wife, Katherine Schwarzenegger. This fact was used to argue the property must have been in good condition, contradicting Perry’s damage claims.

Is there a PERRY Act protecting elderly property sellers?

Not yet. Westcott supporters proposed legislation called the PERRY Act (Protecting Elder Realty for Retirement Years), but it has not been enacted into law as of November 2025.

What was the convent lawsuit with Katy Perry?

In 2018, Perry was involved in another controversial real estate dispute over a Los Angeles convent. Sister Catherine Rose Holzman, 89, collapsed and died during legal proceedings over the property. “To Katy Perry, please stop. It’s not doing anyone any good except hurting a lot of people,” she said moments before her death.

How does Huntington’s Disease affect legal capacity?

Huntington’s Disease is a degenerative neurological condition that can impair cognition over time. However, courts evaluate capacity based on the individual’s condition at the specific moment of signing. Having the diagnosis doesn’t automatically prove incapacity, especially in early stages of the disease.

Can Perry collect the $1.8 million from Westcott?

Yes, if the judgment becomes final and no appeal is filed. However, Westcott is currently in hospice receiving around-the-clock care, which may complicate collection. The judgment will likely be paid from his estate or through his assets.

Expert Legal Analysis: What This Case Means for Contract Law

Legal scholars note several important precedents established by this case:

1. High Bar for Mental Incapacity Claims

The Katy Perry lawsuit demonstrates that courts require substantial evidence to overturn a contract based on mental incapacity. Medical diagnoses alone aren’t sufficient—there must be specific proof that the person couldn’t understand the transaction at the signing moment.

2. Sophisticated Party Doctrine

Westcott’s background as a successful businessman worked against him. Courts are less sympathetic to claims of incapacity from parties with extensive business experience who routinely negotiate complex deals.

3. Post-Transaction Behavior Matters

The fact that Westcott negotiated with multiple parties (including Maria Shriver) suggested he understood the property’s value and his negotiating position—evidence of capacity.

4. Damages Calculation Complexity

The judge will evaluate documented financial losses, payments, and offsets before issuing a final damages figure. This case shows how courts balance competing damage claims using economic evidence.

5. Public Opinion vs. Legal Standards

The judge will not decide based on fairness or emotion, only on evidence directly tied to the contract and the economic impact of the dispute. Despite public sympathy for Westcott, the law governed the outcome.

The Bottom Line: Justice or Heartless?

The Katy Perry lawsuit forces us to confront uncomfortable questions about wealth, power, and the law. On one side, we have contract law principles designed to protect valid agreements. On the other, we have an 86-year-old veteran in hospice care who will pay $1.8 million to a multi-millionaire celebrity.

The Legal Reality: Perry followed the law, proved her case, and won at every stage. The outcome will determine whether Perry recovers millions or ends up paying more herself.

The Moral Question: “This isn’t just a lawsuit, it’s now a David and Goliath narrative – a global superstar with wealth, legal resources and leverage versus an elderly, declining veteran who already lost his home. And that dynamic carries emotional weight.”

Whether you see this as a victory for contract law or a miscarriage of justice likely depends on your view of celebrity privilege, elderly protection laws, and the role of sympathy in legal proceedings. What’s certain is this: the Katy Perry lawsuit will be studied in law schools and debated in public forums for years to come.

Final Update (November 27, 2025): Unless Westcott files an objection within ten days, this five-year legal battle will finally end with Perry taking full ownership of her $15 million Montecito estate for a net cost of approximately $13.2 million—and a serious blow to her public image.

Last Updated: November 27, 2025

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you’re involved in a contract dispute involving mental capacity, consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah