• Brad Pitt filed an appeal to the highest court to review the removal of Judge John W. Ouderkirk from his custody case
  • Pitt and his lawyers believed the panel "incorrectly applied" a crucial requirement in Ouderkirk's disqualification
  • One of Pitt's lawyers said the disqualification of Ouderkirk rewards parties who are losing child custody cases

Brad Pitt argued with the court about its decision to remove Judge John W. Ouderkirk from his custody battle against his ex Angelina Jolie.

The "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood" star, 57, filed an appeal in the Second District Court of Appeal in California requesting the state's highest court to review the decision about Ouderkirk's removal from the custody case. In the court documents obtained by Us Weekly Wednesday, Pitt and his legal team asserted that the judge had been honest and upfront in providing multiple disclosures about his connection with his attorneys. The two-time Golden Globe winner argued that the court "created a conflict" with its decision to remove Ouderkirk and "incorrectly applied" a crucial requirement to do so.

"Review is warranted to resolve whether an administrative error in failing promptly to disclose additional, immaterial matters involving counsel for a party, years after disclosing a significant history of such matters, requires disqualification," the documents indicated.

"After more than four years of contentious litigation, every day of which has harmed the children and their father, an important and considered custody decision will be entirely undone as a result of an administrative error that is wholly unrelated to the merits of the custody dispute itself," the petition continued.

Pitt's lawyer, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., said in a statement to Us Weekly that Ouderkirk "was improperly disqualified after providing a detailed, fact-based custodial decision, following a lengthy legal process with multiple witnesses and experts."

He added that the ruling "will reward parties who are losing child custody cases" and "condone their gamesmanship" which will only harm the children and families involved by prolonging the resolution. He also said that the "crafty" removal of Ouderkirk set a precedent that will "deprive parents of irreplaceable time" with their kids.

"The lower court’s ruling is bad for children and bad for California’s overburdened judicial system," he added.

The judges who oversaw the hearing in July decided to remove Ouderkirk from the case because they believed that his "failure to make mandatory disclosures" about the legal proceedings involving Pitt's lawyers "might cause an objective person, aware of all of the facts" to doubt his impartiality in the case. They cited Ouderkirk's "ethical breach" and "recent professional relationships with Pitt's counsel" and ruled that "disqualification is required."

Due to the ruling, their custody battle could start over again. Los Angeles divorce attorney Mark Vincent Kaplan, who represented celebrities including Kevin Federline, Charlie Sheen and Paula Abdul but is not affiliated with the case, told Us Weely the exes may have already spent "hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions" on litigation. They could spend more if the case will take longer to be finalized.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles divorce attorney Kelly Chang Rickert told Daily Mail that their case could be "one of the most expensive divorce cases in Hollywood history in terms of legal fees."

Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie
Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are pictured attending the WSJ Magazine Innovator Awards on Nov. 4, 2015 in New York City. Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images