Jodie Turner-Smith Steps Out Amid Legal Drama With Ex Joshua Jackson

Jodie Turner-Smith was all smiles as she stepped out in Los Angeles amid her ongoing legal drama with ex-husband Joshua Jackson.
Turner-Smith, 38, wore a black T-shirt featuring a Las Vegas graphic on it, blue jeans, a black baseball cap and black flats for the Sunday, June 15, outing. She accessorized the look with a black and white crossbody bag and chic sunglasses. The model carried a bouquet of flowers as she strolled through the outdoor market.
Later that day, Turner-Smith was seen leaving Chateau Marmont in a colorful outfit after a night out with pals at the L.A. hotspot. The appearances came as Turner-Smith and Jackson, 47, have been battling it out in court over the matter of where their daughter, Juno, 5, should attend elementary school.
The former couple, whose divorce was finalized in May, both wrote letters to each other before Jackson filed a motion claiming that Turner-Smith changed Juno’s school without him agreeing to it.
Breaking Down Joshua Jackson and Jodie Turner-Smith’s Custody Battle
In the motion, which was filed on May 30, Jackson claimed that Turner-Smith felt it was “no big deal to force Juno to start over with a new school.” He alleged she was “attempting to create a scenario where Juno travels with her rather than attending a traditional school,” per the documents obtained by Us Weekly.
Jackson pleaded for the court to order his daughter to stay enrolled at the school she is currently in for the next year. The actor also requested joint approval between him and Turner-Smith on Juno’s schooling in the future.
He included a letter written to Turner-Smith on May 26 in his motion about Juno’s schooling.
“I am happy that we are having this dialogue and look forward to coming to an agreement together that balances all of [Juno’s] needs to provide her with the best outcome possible,” he wrote. “I think that maximizing that frequent, continuing and meaningful contact should be our guiding light [through] all of these conversations and planning of parenting time. Juno needs both of us. Ideally exactly equally.”

Jackson addressed Turner-Smith’s desire to take their daughter overseas while she works.
“I am open to Juno being with you any time you may be able to return to Los Angeles [during her time away in London for work]. I don’t think it’s good for Juno to go for as long as you have proposed without seeing either parent, whenever it is reasonably possible for us to avoid without putting undue stress on Juno,” he wrote. “At this age 4 weeks is an eternity to her. I understand why you are willing to agree to have Juno be based in Los Angeles during that time, it reduces the stress of air travel and time zone shifting on her.”
Turner-Smith allegedly wrote a letter to Jackson on May 23 about hoping to take Juno with her when she goes to work overseas.
“Hi Josh. Thank you for your message. I appreciate your recognition of how fluid the production timeline can be,” she wrote. “Your willingness to accommodate that fluidity truly makes a difference.”
Joshua Jackson and Jodie Turner-Smith’s Tumultuous Divorce Explained
“I’m also glad we agree that our shared goal is to provide Juno with as much stability, consistency and meaningful time with both of us as possible,” the letter continued. “I hear and appreciate your point that this is ultimately her time with each of us, and not the other way around. That framing feels important.”
Jackson and Turner-Smith previously hashed out a divorce deal in May, agreeing to joint legal and physical custody of Juno. Turner-Smith claimed Jackson violated the terms of their divorce settlement in a motion saying that he was blocking her from having final say over Juno’s school. Jackson fired back at the claims in a June 12 filing, alleging that Turner-Smith was the one not following their agreement. Specifically, Jackson claimed that Turner-Smith did not consult with him before making the decision about the school, and claimed she chose a school that was far away from his rental home.
“Jodie has not earned the right to choose schools under the terms of the orders, because she failed to engage in good faith efforts to ‘meet and confer,” he alleged.
The case is still ongoing.