Katy Perry Demands $5M in Damages in Long-Running Fight With Disabled Veteran

26th Nov 2025
Katy Perry’s $5 Million Court Fight: Inside the High-Stakes Battle Over Her Montecito Mansion Katy Perry is seeking $4.7 million in damages from seller Carl Westcott, arguing he caused major financial losses by attempting to void the 2020 sale of her $15 million Montecito home. A judge has already ruled that Westcott was mentally competent when he signed the contract, but both sides are now fighting over who owes money as the case moves into its final financial phase. The outcome will determine whether Perry recovers millions or ends up paying more herself. Inside the Explosive Ruling Over Her Montecito Mansion Katy Perry’s long-running real estate battle exploded again this week as the pop star demanded nearly $5 million in damages tied to the disputed sale of her $15 million Montecito mansion. Court documents filed on November 21 show Perry, 41, accusing 85-year-old seller and disabled veteran Carl Westcott of derailing her plans for the property by attempting to back out of their 2020 agreement just days after signing it. The fight unfolded in Los Angeles County court, where the two sides have been locked in litigation for more than four years. The controversy began when Westcott, founder of 1-800-Flowers claimed he lacked capacity at the time of the sale because he was under the influence of pain medication. But in May 2024, a judge ruled decisively in Perry’s favor, finding “no persuasive evidence” that he was mentally impaired when he agreed to the deal. Now the case has shifted from liability to money, and Perry says Westcott’s reversal caused enormous financial harm, from lost rental income to expensive repairs. The emotional stakes are unmistakable: an elderly veteran facing massive legal exposure, and one of the world’s biggest entertainers insisting she is simply seeking “justice” for a contract she says was fully valid. With both sides trading multimillion-dollar demands, the legal and human tension surrounding the case is reaching a breaking point. 👉 Katy Perry’s Real Estate Warzone: How Her Legal Battles Sparked a Law to Protect Seniors 👈 What We Know So Far After buying the Montecito estate in 2020, Perry and her team were informed that Westcott no longer wanted to proceed with the sale. He argued he was impaired by painkillers at the time he signed the contract and immediately attempted to rescind it. The dispute triggered a complex civil lawsuit over capacity, consent, and contractual validity. In May 2024, the judge determined that Westcott was of sound mind, clearing the way for Perry to take ownership. The court found that he presented no credible evidence showing incapacity. Following the liability ruling, Perry submitted a detailed financial claim asserting she lost $3.5 million in rental value and spent over $1.3 million on repairs caused or delayed by the years-long litigation. After deductions, she argues Westcott owes $4,718,698.95. Westcott’s attorneys dispute this entirely. They say Perry still owes him $6 million of the purchase price, claiming she has paid only $9 million so far. They propose reversing some repair costs but insist Perry remains financially liable to him. The Legal Issue At The Centre This is a civil contract dispute focused on two core questions: Was the real estate contract valid when signed? If so, what financial damages if any, each party owes after years of litigation? In cases like this, courts typically evaluate mental capacity at the time of contract formation. The standard is whether the person understood the nature and consequences of the transaction. In May 2024, the court ruled Westcott met that standard. Now the case has entered the damages phase, where both sides present evidence of financial losses. The court reviews documentation such as repair invoices, rental estimates, payments made, and contract terms. The next steps normally include final written arguments, judicial review of each monetary claim, and a calculation of offsets. 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. Key Questions People Are Asking Is Katy Perry facing jail time? No. This is a civil real estate case, not a criminal proceeding. The only outcomes involve money — not incarceration. What charges are actually on the table? There are no criminal charges. The case concerns breach-of-contract claims, capacity arguments, and competing financial demands related to the sale. How strong is the evidence at this stage? The judge has already ruled on the central issue — Westcott’s capacity — siding with Perry. The remaining dispute revolves around financial documentation, which is largely numbers-driven and easier for courts to evaluate. Could the case be dismissed? No. Because the court already issued a ruling on liability, the only remaining issue is determining the final monetary award. The damages phase must conclude. How long could the legal process take? Damages determinations can take weeks or months, depending on hearings and judicial review. Since the liability question is settled, the case is nearing its end. What This Means For Ordinary People At its core, this case highlights how capacity challenges and contract rescission claims work in real estate. When someone tries to undo a signed deal, courts look at whether the person understood the transaction — not whether they later regretted it. It also shows how long legal battles can create substantial financial consequences. Lost rental value, repair delays, and legal fees can stack up quickly, and either party may end up owing money depending on the evidence. For everyday homeowners, the lesson is simple: once a contract is signed, withdrawing requires strong, documented proof of incapacity or procedural error. Without that, courts generally uphold the agreement. Possible Outcomes Based On Current Facts Best-case scenario (for Perry):The court accepts her financial calculations, deducts minimal offsets, and awards her the full $4.7 million in damages. Worst-case scenario (for Perry):The judge sides with Westcott’s accounting and determines Perry still owes a remaining balance on the property, reducing or eliminating her damage claims. Most common outcome in similar cases:Courts often split the numbers, verifying some claimed losses, rejecting others, and issuing a final amount based on documented evidence rather than either side’s full request. Key Questions Answered in Her Montecito Mansion Battle Did the court already decide ownership of the house? Yes. The judge’s May 2024 ruling upholding the contract confirmed Perry’s legal right to the property. Does Westcott’s veteran status affect the legal standard? No. Capacity and contract law apply equally. The court evaluates evidence, not personal background. Why are rental losses part of the damages? Perry argues that litigation kept her from using or renting the home, leading to quantifiable financial losses supported by market estimates. Can the parties still settle privately? Yes. Even at this stage, both sides can negotiate a financial settlement outside court. Katy Perry Awaits Final Decision in Mansion Dispute Katy Perry’s lawsuit has moved past the question of whether the 2020 sale was valid, the court already ruled it was. The final issue now is money, with both Perry and Westcott presenting competing multimillion-dollar calculations. The judge will evaluate documented financial losses, payments, and offsets before issuing a final damages figure. Whatever the outcome, the case underscores how contract disputes can evolve into protracted, high-stakes financial battles that remain legally significant long after the original transaction.