State Champ Radio Lawsuit
Page: 10
HipHopWired Featured Video
Lil Durk, already facing a mountain of legal issues, was just named in a wrongful death lawsuit in connection to the murder-for-hire plot that left a cousin of a rival dead. In the recent court filing in Illinois, Lil Durk, his record label, and another business were the target of the lawsuit.
As reported by the Chicago Sun-Times, Lil Durk, real name Durk Banks, is being held on charges connected to the shooting death of rival rapper Quando Rondo’s cousin, Saviay’a Robinson, also known as Lul Pab or Bandup Pablo. The lawsuit was filed in Cook County in Durk’s home state and is aimed towards his Only The Family recording label and a connected business interest along with the rapper.
“The premature loss of Mr. Robinson has devastated his family and community,” Warren Postman, an attorney representing Robinson’s mother, Andrea Laquila Robinson, shared. “We filed this lawsuit to hold those responsible accountable and to ensure his family receives the support they need during this difficult time.”
There has not been an official response from Banks or his legal team.
Lil Durk was arrested in October of last year in Miami as he attempted to board a chartered plane. The arrest came as investigators unsealed an indictment that revealed charges against five men in the murder-for-hire plot. Quando Rondo, real name Tyquian Bowman, was the alleged target of the hit but Robinson was the one who was gunned down in Los Angeles back in 2022.
Rondo was targeted in response to the shooting death of Durk ally King Von, who died after confronting Rondo and his crew in Atlanta. Authorities say that Durk’s Only The Family recording label was also a front for a criminal organization with Durk as its mastermind.
—
Photo: Getty
Megan Thee Stallion (Megan Pete) and her legal team have been granted permission to depose Tory Lanez (Daystar Peterson) behind bars following a ruling by a federal judge on Monday (Feb. 24). “Plaintiff may take the oral deposition of Daystar Peterson, either remotely via videoconference technology or as otherwise arranged upon agreement with the California […]
R&B star Chloe Bailey (performing as Chlöe) has been accused of failing to properly credit and pay a songwriter who worked on her album Trouble in Paradise and of commercially releasing the songs he wrote without his consent, according to court documents filed in the Southern District of New York on Thursday (Feb. 20).
In the lawsuit, filed by attorney Tyrone Blackburn, songwriter Melvin “4rest” Moore alleges that the actions of Bailey, along with her label Parkwood Entertainment and Columbia Records, constitute “copyright infringement, fraudulent misrepresentation, violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), civil conspiracy and deceptive business practices.”
According to the complaint, Bailey “fail[ed] to appropriately credit or compensate” Moore in connection with the songs he worked on for Trouble in Paradise — “Favorite,” “Might As Well” and “Same Lingerie” — which Moore says were written about his own “personal and…lived experiences.” It also claims that Moore “did not grant consent to the commercial exploitation of the [songs]” he wrote for Bailey and that he did not get an opportunity to “engage in good-faith negotiations” with Bailey’s team around contractual terms, citing an email from Moore’s attorney to Bailey’s counsel on Aug. 8, 2024.
Trending on Billboard
(Records from ASCAP and BMI’s Songview repertory, which contain official accounts about which writers and publishers worked on a given song, indicate that Moore is listed as a writer for “Same Lingerie” and “Might As Well” but not for “Favorite.”)
The lawsuit calls Bailey, Parkwood and Columbia “modern-day swindlers” and claims that Moore’s attorney “repeatedly made good-faith attempts to amicably resolve the matter of [Bailey, Parkwood and Columbia’s] unauthorized commercial exploitation of the works” over the course of “almost 200 days.”
After not being able to reach an agreement, Moore’s attorney says he issued a DMCA takedown notice, asking for the songs Moore worked on to be removed from the internet. The complaint adds that Moore’s team feels their takedown was “willfully and blatantly ignored.”
Moore is asking for monetary damages up to $150,000 for each intentional violation; a court order to stop further commercial use of the songs; a complete investigation of Bailey, Parkwood and Columbia’s revenue from unauthorized use of the songs; repayment of all profits gained from the songs; a requirement for defendants to publicly retract their claims and properly credit Moore; punitive damages of $5 million per song; and any additional relief the court finds appropriate.
Representatives for Bailey, Parkwood and Columbia Records did not respond to Billboard‘s requests for comment by press time.
An attorney for The 1975 says frontman Matt Healy and his bandmates cannot be held responsible for the cancellation of the July 2023 Good Vibes Festival in Kuala Lumpur, which was shut down by authorities after Healy kissed one of his male bandmates on stage, violating the country’s ban on same-sex relationships. As a result […]
A lawsuit accusing Bassnectar (born Lorin Ashton) of sexually abusing three underage girls has been settled ahead of trial. According to court documents filed in U.S. District Court in Tennessee on Tuesday (Feb. 18), the case against the electronic music producer was dismissed with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled, after the two sides reached […]
The civil lawsuit accusing Jay-Z (Shawn Carter) of raping a 13-year-old girl alongside Sean “Diddy” Combs in 2000 has been voluntarily dismissed, according to court documents filed on Friday (Feb. 14).
“Today is a victory. The frivolous, fictitious and appalling allegations have been dismissed,” Carter wrote in a post on Roc Nation’s official Instagram account. “This civil suit was without merit and never going anywhere. The fictional tale they created was laughable, if not for the seriousness of the claims. I would not wish this experience on anyone. The trauma that my wife, my children, my loved ones and I have endured can never be dismissed.”
The case was dismissed with prejudice against all defendants, meaning it cannot be refiled.
Filed in New York federal court in December, the complaint alleged that Carter and Combs drugged and assaulted the Jane Doe plaintiff during an after-party following the MTV Video Music Awards. The case arrived as an updated version of a previous lawsuit filed against Combs only.
At the time, Carter called the lawsuit a “blackmail attempt” designed to result in a settlement. He further called the Jane Doe’s attorney, Tony Buzbee — notable for filing a slew of sexual assault lawsuits against Combs — a “fraud,” a “deplorable human” and an “ambulance chaser in a cheap suit.”
In his Instagram post on Friday, Carter took further aim at Buzbee, writing, “This 1-800 lawyer gets to file a suit hiding behind Jane Doe, and when they quickly realize that the money grab is going to fail, they get to walk away with no repercussions. The system has failed.
“The court must protect victims, OF COURSE, while with the same ethical responsibility, the courts must protect the innocent from being accused without a shred of evidence. May the truth prevail for all victims and those falsely accused equally.”
In a statement sent to Billboard, Carter’s attorney, Alex Spiro, said the following: “The false case against JAY-Z, that never should have been brought, has been dismissed with prejudice. By standing up in the face of heinous and false allegations, Jay has done what few can — he pushed back, he never settled, he never paid 1 red penny, he triumphed and cleared his name.”
“Today’s complete dismissal without a settlement by the 1-800 attorney is yet another confirmation that these lawsuits are built on falsehoods, not facts,” said a lawyer for Combs in a statement. “For months, we have seen case after case filed by individuals hiding behind anonymity, pushed forward by an attorney more focused on media headlines than legal merit. Just like this claim, the others will fall apart because there is no truth to them. Sean Combs has never sexually assaulted or trafficked anyone—man or woman, adult or minor. No number of lawsuits, sensationalized allegations, or media theatrics will change that reality. We will continue to fight these baseless claims and hold those responsible. This is just the first of many that will not hold up in a court of law.”
Buzbee declined to comment on the dismissal.
This story was updated to add statements from Carter and Combs’ attorneys.
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: The Washington Post / Getty
Kanye West’s hate speech had landed him in another legal battle. A former Jewish employee has filed a claim against him for anti-semitism and more.
Variety Magazine is reporting that an unidentified woman who once worked at YEEZY is seeking damages against Kanye West. Jane Doe claims the performer harassed her and other workers via text messages because of her Jewish faith. Some of the hateful messages included “I Am A Nazi,” and “Welcome to the first day of working for Hitler.” She details that the harassment started in January of 2024. A couple of weeks later Kanye issued an apology in Hebrew but started using similar hateful language towards the staff shortly after.
The marketing executive suggested Kanye West denounce any ties to Nazism in an effort to better position his forthcoming album at the time Vultures Vol. 1. This suggestion was communicated to Ye by another employee to which West allegedly responded “I Am A Nazi” via text. Jane Doe says she was terminated from the company in March 2024 only to be rehired shortly after with her salary doubled. Later in June she claims Kanye sent out another text to several employees asking “What the F*** Is Everybody Here Getting Paid?” He targeted her a series of messages including “Come destroy me bi***.”
The suit not only alleges that Kanye West was guilty of religious discrimination but also gender discrimination and wrongful termination. “Ye waged a relentless and deliberate campaign of antisemitism and misogyny against my client,” said the plaintiff’s lawyer, Carney Shegerian. “His appalling treatment of women and fixation on Nazism, evident in abusive texts where he repeatedly calls himself Hitler, expose his motives. We need to stop excusing Ye’s behavior. As a father, husband, and employer, he must be held accountable. Ye dared my client to sue, and we will see him in court.”
Last week Ye’s X account, formerly known as Twitter, was deactivated due to similar rants where he referred to himself as a Nazi, complimented Adolf Hitler and even said “JEWS WERE BETTER AS SLAVES YOU HAVE TO PUT YOUR JEWS IN THEIR PLACE AND MAKE THEM INTO YOUR SLAVES.” Since then he has been dropped by his talented agency and Shopify suspended his http://www.yeezy.com e-commerce store.
Kanye West nor his representatives have yet to formally comment on the lawsuit.
Ye (formerly Kanye West) is facing a lawsuit from a former employee who says the rapper compared himself to Hitler and threatened her because she is Jewish.
The case, filed Tuesday (Feb. 11) in Los Angeles court, claims he subjected the unnamed woman to “antisemitic vitriol,” including texting her “Hail Hitler” and calling her “ugly” and a “bitch.” And the woman says she was “swiftly terminated” when she complained.
“Ye carried out a calculated campaign to threaten and psychologically torment Jewish people around him, specifically plaintiff,” the woman’s lawyers wrote. “There can be little doubt that Ye treats those around him, especially Jewish people and women, much worse than just a bully. He is a self-proclaimed ‘Nazi’.”
The Jane Doe accuses Ye and his Yeezy LLC of religious and gender discrimination, wrongful termination, breach of contract, and a variety of other legal wrongdoing.
The new lawsuit, one of many filed by former employees against Ye, came days after he went on an offensive tirade on X (formerly Twitter) that included antisemitic comments (“I’m a Nazi” and praise for Adolf Hitler) as well as a bizarre demand to free Sean “Diddy” Combs, who is currently in custody awaiting trial on sex crime charges. On Sunday, Ye ran a TV ad during the Super Bowl that directed viewers to an online store where they could purchase a shirt emblazoned with a swastika.
It was hardly the first time the rapper has made such statements. After a string of similar antisemitic rhetoric and other erratic behavior in October 2022, the star lost much of what was a once-formidable business empire, including fashion partnerships with Adidas, The Gap and Balenciaga, as well as his representation by Creative Artists Agency and many of his lawyers.
In Tuesday’s lawsuit, the Jane Doe plaintiff says she was hired at Ye’s Yeezy LLC as a marketing specialist in December 2023, shortly before he issued an apology (written in Hebrew) for those earlier antisemitic statements. But she says the apologetic sentiment was “short lived.”
A month later, amid renewed controversy over the cover art of his Vultures Vol. 1, the woman claims she suggested that Ye issue a statement condemning Nazism. When the message was relayed to the star himself, he allegedly responded with a text message (included in the lawsuit) reading “I Am A Nazi.”
“This not only deeply offended Doe but the loud and proud antisemitism also made her feel endangered,” her attorneys wrote.
Months later, the rapper allegedly texted her and another Jewish employee “What the fuck is everyone here getting paid?” In another screenshotted text, he allegedly followed up: “Welcome to the first day of working for Hitler.”
The abuse allegedly escalated from there, the lawsuit says, including a series of texts in June 2024 in which Ye allegedly said “Shut the f— up b—-” called her “ugly as f—” and texted “Hail Hitler.” Later, he also allegedly texted, “You what’s left after I said deathcon” — a message that Jane Doe says was intended to reference his previous antisemitic rants and meant as a threat based on her religion.
Just hours after she complained about the text messages to her manager, the lawsuit says she was sent an email from an attorney representing Yeezy terminating her employment.
A spokesman for Ye did not immediately return a request for comment on Tuesday (Feb. 11).
Don Henley and his longtime manager Irving Azoff are being sued by one of the men who was criminally charged — and later vindicated — for allegedly attempting to sell handwritten lyrics connected to the Eagles‘ 1976 album Hotel California, claiming they and their attorneys engaged in a “malicious prosecution” that harmed his reputation and caused him financial losses and emotional distress.
The complaint, filed in New York state court on Thursday (Feb. 6), was filed against Henley, Azoff and the firms that represented them in their case: Manatt, Phelps & Phillips and Loeb & Loeb. In it, Horowitz claims the parties falsely alleged that he and his two co-defendants in the criminal case “knew or had reason to believe” that the lyric sheets “had been unlawfully obtained” and nonetheless attempted to profit off of them via an online auction. However, Horowitz claims the men and their attorneys knew all along that the notes had been acquired through legal means in the first place.
Trending on Billboard
Horowitz, a rare book dealer, and his co-defendants — Rock & Roll Hall of Fame curator Craig Inciardi and memorabilia auctioneer Edward Kosinski — were criminally charged in 2022 over an alleged conspiracy to resell the lyrics that had been handwritten by Henley while working on the Eagles’ iconic Hotel California album. At the time, prosecutors had accused the three men of hiding the fact that the documents had been stolen from Henley’s home by Ed Sanders, a journalist hired by Henley and Azoff to write a never-published book on the Eagles in the late 1970s.
But in a stunning turnaround in March 2024, Manhattan prosecutors dropped the case after Henley produced new evidence previously withheld under attorney-client privilege that cast doubt on his and Azoff’s allegations. The judge in the case subsequently dismissed the charges and chastised Henley, Azoff and their attorneys for “obfuscat[ing] and hid[ing] information that they believed would be damaging to their position that the lyric sheets were stolen.”
According to Horowitz’s attorney Caitlin Robin, the evidence cited by prosecutors and the judge in dropping the charges — a series of emails between Henley, Azoff and their attorneys — proves they were aware that Sanders had legally obtained the lyric sheets in the course of writing the never-published Eagles book. Nonetheless, she alleges they “purposefully withheld any disclosure thereof because they knew it would exculpate Plaintiff GLENN HOROWITZ and essentially destroy the fraudulent allegations they made about him.”
As a result of his “unjust prosecution,” Horowitz claims he “was deprived of his liberty and suffered humiliation, defamation, media harassment, diminished reputation, loss of business and/or loss of wages amounting in more than ten million dollars ($10,000,000.00), in addition to mental anguish, indignity, frustration and financial loss.” The complaint further alleges that Horowitz’s wife Tracey (who is listed as a co-plaintiff) also “suffered humiliation, defamation, media harassment, diminished reputation, and mental and emotional anguish” as a result of her husband’s prosecution.
In a statement sent to Billboard, Henley and Azoff’s attorney Dan Petrocelli said, “Don Henley was a witness and a victim in a criminal trial brought by the Manhattan District Attorney after a formal indictment of Glenn Horowitz by a New York grand jury. The indictment highlighted the dark underbelly of the memorabilia business that exploited the brazen, unauthorized taking and selling of Mr. Henley’s handwritten lyrics. The only malicious prosecution involved here is the filing of this case by Mr. Horowitz.”
The Horowitzes are asking for damages “in excess of the jurisdictional limits of all the lower Courts of the State of New York.”
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips and Loeb & Loeb did not immediately respond to Billboard‘s requests for comment.
Megan Thee Stallion can proceed with a defamation lawsuit accusing social media personality Milagro Gramz of waging a “campaign of harassment” against the star on behalf of Tory Lanez, a federal judge says.
The rapper sued Gramz (Milagro Cooper) last year, claiming the YouTuber had been “churning out falsehoods” about the high-profile criminal case against Lanez, in which he was convicted of shooting Megan in the foot during a 2020 dispute in the Hollywood Hills.
In a 25-page decision on Friday (Feb. 7), Judge Cecilia Altonaga denied a request by Gramz to dismiss the case, saying Megan had made a “compelling case” that the blogger had defamed her by claiming the star lied during Lanez’s trial and that she was “mentally retarded.”
“Plaintiff’s claims extend far beyond mere negligence — they paint a picture of an intentional campaign to destroy her reputation,” the judge wrote. “That is more than enough to [deny the motion to dismiss].”
The judge also refused to dismiss Megan’s other claims against Gramz, including that Gramz had violated a Florida state law by sharing a pornographic “deepfake” of the rapper. Defense attorneys had argued that Gramz had not actually shared the clip merely by “liking” it on X, but Judge Altonaga noted Friday that she’d allegedly done more than that.
“By ‘liking’ an X.com post that featured the deepfake video, the video was exhibited on defendant’s X.com account’s ‘Likes’ page,” the judge wrote. “Defendant also brought the video ‘before the public’ when she allegedly directed viewers of her post to click on her ‘Likes’ page where the video had been archived.”
The judge did dismiss one claim — Megan’s accusation of cyberstalking — but allowed her to refile the case this month to try to fix the error.
In a statement to Billboard, Gramz’s attorney Michael A. Pancier stressed that the decision was an early-stage ruling subject only to a “more lenient legal standard” and that “many of these issues will be revisited at a later stage following the completion of the discovery process.”
“This decision does not reflect a determination on the merits of the case,” Pancier said. “The plaintiff must now substantiate her claims with credible and admissible evidence.”
A rep for Megan declined to comment on the ruling.
Lanez (Daystar Peterson) was convicted in December 2022 on three felony counts over the violent 2020 incident, in which he shot at the feet of Megan during an argument following a pool party at Kylie Jenner’s house in the Hollywood Hills. In August 2023, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison. He has filed an appeal, which remains pending.
In an October lawsuit, Megan’s attorneys accused Gramz of repeatedly spreading falsehoods about that criminal case, including questioning whether Megan was even shot and claiming she was “caught trying to deceive the courts.” More recently, they said Gramz had pushed the “outlandish claim” that the gun Lanez used in the shooting had gone missing from evidence.
The lawsuit claimed the blogger made those claims because she was serving as a “mouthpiece and puppet” for Lanez as the singer sat behind bars. In an updated version of the lawsuit filed in December, Megan’s attorneys said prison call logs suggested that Lanez and his father had arranged to pay Gramz.
In seeking to dismiss the case, defense attorneys argued that Megan could not meet the difficult requirement of showing that Gramz had acted with “actual malice” — that she had either intentionally lied about Megan or had acted with a reckless disregard for the truth.
But in Friday’s ruling, Judge Altonaga said that the rapper’s claims, if later proven with evidence, would likely be enough to win a defamation case.
“The [lawsuit] makes a compelling case that defendant acted with reckless disregard for the truth,” the judge wrote. “Plaintiff asserts that readily available information contradicted defendant’s statements at the time of publication [and that] defendant knowingly spread these falsehoods at Peterson’s direction, fully aware they were fabricated to harm plaintiff.”
“Finally, defendant seemingly profited from the defamation — gaining a larger social media following, online notoriety, and lucrative sponsorship opportunities,” the judge added.
