The legal fight about who is to blame for Johnny Depp’s financial troubles took a new turn when Depp’s former managers filed an amended cross-complaint today in Los Angeles Superior Court. In the oft-redacted filing, The Management Group’s lawyers cite new expenses incurred by Depp that they say proves it was the actor who mismanaged his money.

Depp sees it the other way, originally suing TMG in January for $25 million alleging 11 complaints ranging from fraud to breach of contract to professional negligence. Depp claims TMG paid itself more than $28 million in contingency fees without a written agreement; failed to file or pay his taxes on time, resulting in more than $5.6 million in fees and penalties on his federal returns; and “loaning” nearly $10 million to third parties without Depp’s authorization.

Today’s amended cross-complaint came after a hearing earlier this month in which Judge Teresa Beaudet denied TMG’s desire for declaratory relief that Depp “caused his own financial waste” but ruled that its claim of promissory fraud against the Oscar nominee can stand. It cites Depp’s “ultra-extravagant lifestyle” over the 17-year period TMG repped the actor, a lifestyle that “knowingly cost Depp in excess of $2 million per month to maintain, which he simply could not afford.” In addition to previous examples of un-repaid loans and debts, it cited having to eventually pay off a Visa credit card to the tune of $55,000. (Read the entire cross-complaint here.)

“Today TMG filed its amended Cross-Complaint, which includes the mirror image of Johnny Depp’s tenth claim for declaratory relief,” wrote TMG attorney Michael Kump of Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert LLP. “Depp’s exorbitant spending remains at the center of this case. The Cross-Complaint is being redacted because Depp is doing everything in his power to hide the identity of the friends and family to whom TMG supposedly distributed money without his authorization. Depp knows how ridiculous he will look when these false allegations are publicly disclosed.”

The case is set to go before a jury on January 24 next year.