Lawsuit
Page: 25
Selena Quintanilla‘s father, Abraham Quintanilla Jr., is suing Los Angeles-based Catalina Classic Cruises over an “unauthorized” live tribute in honor of the late Tejano star. Explore Explore See latest videos, charts and news See latest videos, charts and news According to the lawsuit, filed Monday (July 10) in the Central District of California, Selena’s father […]
A Los Angeles judge says Lady Gaga is not obligated to pay out on a $500,000 “no questions asked” reward for the return of her stolen French bulldogs — at least not to a woman who was criminally charged over the violent 2021 incident.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
In a ruling Monday (July 10) reported by TMZ, Judge Holly J. Fujie dismissed a breach of contract lawsuit filed by Jennifer McBride, who pleaded no contest in December to receiving stolen property in connection with the gunpoint robbery in which Gaga’s dog walker Ryan Fischer was shot and nearly killed.
McBride had argued that Gaga’s offer of a reward was “unilateral” — meaning she had to pay up no matter the circumstances. But in Monday’s decision, Judge Fujie reportedly agreed with arguments from Gaga’s attorneys: That a criminal like McBridge could not “profit from her participation in a crime.”
Neither side immediately returned requests for comment on Monday.
McBride is one of five people charged over the Feb. 24, 2021, gunpoint dog-napping of Gaga’s bulldogs, Koji and Gustav. Prosecutors say the singer was not specifically targeted, and that the group was merely trying to steal French bulldogs, which can be worth thousands of dollars.
James Howard Jackson, the man who shot Fischer during the robbery, took a plea deal in December and was sentenced to 21 years in prison.
Days after the attack, it was McBride who returned the dogs to police, claiming she’d found the animals tied to a pole and asking about the reward. While police initially told the media that McBride appeared to be “uninvolved and unassociated” with the crime, she was later connected to the robbery and charged with one count of receiving stolen property and one count of being an accessory after the fact. In December, she pleaded no contest to the property charge and was sentenced to two years of probation.
But just two months later, McBride was back in court again — filing a civil lawsuit claiming she deserves the credit for returning the superstar’s bulldogs. The case argued Gaga made a binding “unilateral” offer to pay the reward in return for the safe return of the dogs, and that McBride had taken her up on the proposal by flipping on the men who actually committed the robbery.
“Plaintiff accepted defendants’ unilateral offer by contacting defendants, and delivering Lady Gaga’s bulldogs to defendants at the Los Angeles Police Department,” McBride’s lawyer, K.T. Tran, wrote in the lawsuit. “Plaintiff has fully performed her obligation under the unilateral contract.”
But Gaga’s attorneys quickly moved to end the case, arguing last month that it would be absurd to allow McBride to “profit from her participation in a crime” and “rewarded for her role in the conspiracy.”
“The law does not allow a person to commit a crime and then profit from it,” Gaga’s lawyers at the firm Gibson Dunn wrote in their filings. “This principle applies with extra force in this case because the theft of Defendant’s dogs was facilitated by a violent gun crime that left one man nearly dead.”
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: STAN HONDA / Getty
A judge has ordered previously confidential details of Diddy’s lawsuit against Diageo to be unsealed, revealing startling allegations.
On Wednesday (July 5th), Judge Joel Cohen ordered the confidential elements of the mogul’s lawsuit filed in May to be unsealed for public viewing, declaring that Diageo can only keep specific parts off-limits. This followed a ruling last Friday (June 30th). The lawsuit by Diddy demands that the global brand, which oversees over 200 beer and liquor companies including Guinness, treat his DeLeon tequila brand “at least as favorably” as others under its umbrella per their 2013 agreement.
The details that have been revealed show some startling allegations. These details included Diageo apparently presenting Diddy with a watermelon-flavored version of his tequila despite his objections and attempts to educate the company on the ills of such a move. Another complaint made by Diddy, aka Sean Combs, says that Diageo informed him that all of their agave plant production would be directed towards the company’s other tequila brands in 2021, forcing DeLeon to hurriedly hunt for suppliers in a tight market.
Related Stories
Combs has also stated that since Diageo’s purchase of competing tequila brands Don Julio and Casamigos in 2014 and 2017, the company insisted on positioning the DeLeon brand as an “urban” brand and paid little attention to its marketing. The suit points to a statistic that as of last year, DeLeon was marketed in 3% of potential areas as opposed to Don Julio being marketed in 36% of potential areas. In addition, the brand has been listed as “out of stock” in major markets at least ten times over the last year.
In response, Diageo released a statement. “His attempt to recast follow-up discussions regarding innovations for DeLeon is, as is his entire suit, disingenuous and self-serving,” it said. They also claimed that Diddy was highly supportive of their actions in the past, pointing to his backing of the production of Ciroc Summer Watermelon. Diageo is now in the process of terminating its partnership with Ciroc Vodka and Combs, which first began in 2007.
HipHopWired Radio
Our staff has picked their favorite stations, take a listen…
A man who unsuccessfully sued Cardi B after his giant back tattoo was unwittingly photoshopped into one of her album covers has agreed to repay a whopping $350,000 in legal bills that the superstar spent defeating his lawsuit.
Months after a jury rejected Kevin Brophy’s case against Cardi, his lawyers told a federal judge Monday (June 12) that he would not only reimburse the money that the rapper had dropped on her attorneys but also voluntarily end his efforts to revive the case and waive any chance at a future appeal.
Why would he do all that? Possibly because Cardi’s lawyers were gearing up to formally demand that he repay her attorneys’ fees — a prize to which she was potentially eligible after beating his accusations in court. Under that process, Cardi and her pricey team of lawyers could have won even more than $350,000.
“The parties now have reached an agreement avoiding the necessity of defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees and application to tax costs,” the two sides wrote in Monday’s filing, hinting at the looming threat of such a fee motion from Cardi’s team.
Attorneys for both sides declined to comment on the agreement when reached by Billboard on Monday.
Brophy sued Cardi in 2017 for millions in damages, claiming he was “devastated, humiliated and embarrassed” by the cover of Cardi’s Gangsta Bitch. The image featured the then-rising star taking a swig of a large beer, staring directly into the camera with her legs spread wide and holding a man’s head while he appears to perform oral sex on her.
The actual man in the image was a model who had consented to the shoot, but a giant tattoo on the man’s back belonged to Brophy. Unbeknownst to Cardi, a freelance graphic designer had typed “back tattoos” into Google Image Search, found one that fit (Brophy’s) and superimposed it onto the model’s body.
Brophy’s lawsuit claimed Cardi and others involved in the cover had used his likeness without his consent and also violated his right to privacy by casting him in a “false light” that was “highly offensive.” Cardi’s lawyers called the allegations “sheer fantasy” and “vastly overblown,” arguing that nobody would have recognized a relatively unknown man based merely on his back.
During a four-day trial in October, Cardi took the stand to defend herself. When examined by Brophy’s attorney, A. Barry Cappello, things repeatedly got heated between the two — so much so that at one point the judge cleared the jury, told Cappello he had “totally crossed the line” and threatened to declare a mistrial.
At the end of the trial, the jury agreed with the superstar’s defenses, clearing Cardi of all Brophy’s claims. Brophy later asked the judge to throw out the verdict for a lack of evidence, but the judge denied that motion in December. Brophy then filed a motion in January seeking a new trial, arguing that the star “engaged in theatrics” on the witness stand and deprived him of a fair trial.
Under Monday’s agreement, that motion will be withdrawn, and Brophy will “waive and irrevocably relinquish” any chance to challenge the verdict on appeal. In return, Cardi’s attorneys will similarly waive their right to file a motion formally seeking an award of attorneys’ fees.
Seven months after Migos rapper Takeoff was shot to death in a Texas bowling alley, his mother, Titania Davenport, has filed a wrongful death suit against the venue.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Davenport filed the lawsuit on Wednesday (June 7) against the bowling alley’s property owners as well as several LLCs connected to the business. The complaint alleges that despite being notified of the private party where Takeoff (born Kirsnick Khari Tiquon Ball) was shot prior to it taking place on Oct. 31, 2022, the defendants “failed to provide proper and adequate security for the event.”
“Defendants breached their duty owed to Kirsnick Khari Tiquon Ball by failing to exercise ordinary care to keep the premises safe,” the lawsuit states. It continues that the venue was rented by the family of music executive J. Prince for an “after hours” event “with potentially many artists, popular athletes and public figures [in attendance].”
Takeoff died at the downtown Houston venue around 2:50 a.m. on Nov. 1, when investigators said someone started shooting, causing guests to flee the area. During the melee, Takeoff was shot in the head or neck by a “stray bullet,” according to his record label Quality Control Music. Takeoff’s uncle Quavo, also a member of Migos, was with his nephew when the tragedy took place and was heard in video footage pleading for help. Takeoff was pronounced dead at the scene.
The suit points to alleged negligence on the part of the defendants, claiming they “provided no screening mechanisms, no after-hour controls or security measures, and no enforcement of rules or industry standards to deter crime against their invitees.”
“As a proximate and foreseeable result of Defendants’ negligence, Kirsnick Khari TiquonBall sustained catastrophic personal injuries, endured conscious pain and suffering, experienced mental anguish, became aware of his impending death, wrongfully died, and suffered other damages as will be proven at trial,” the complaint continues.
In total, the lawsuit refers to 18 separate instances of alleged negligence, including not providing “adequate and appropriate security personnel” and “negligently misrepresenting to invitees that the property was safe.”
Davenport, who is listed on the complaint as the administrator of Takeoff’s estate, is seeking at least $1 million.
Representatives for defendants 810 Billiards & Bowling, LVA4Houston Greenstreet, Lionstone Partners, Midway Companies and Cushman & Wakefield of Texas did not immediately respond to Billboard‘s requests for comment.
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: Bernard Smalls for iOne Digital / Bernard Smalls iOne Digital
While their legal fight against Sabrina Peterson isn’t over, T.I. and Tiny Harris have scored a minor victory. A judge has thrown out some of her claims.
As per AllHipHop the Atlanta trapper turned rapper was sued by Sabrina Peterson back in 2021. The entrepreneur accused T.I. of threatening her life with a firearm. “The first victim allegedly had the same gun that was pulled on me, her three children were forced in the closet at gunpoint. She described the same gun [from T.I.]. She described the same exact gun. There’s no way that this woman would be able to vividly describe this gun unless she actually seen this very gun,” Peterson said on an interview with Hollywood Unlocked at the time.
But Law 360 reports that this week, California’s Second District Court of Appeal tossed out some of her claims specifically her allegations of trade libel, suffering emotional distress and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage. Therefore she will have to pay “fees and costs incurred both in the trial court and on appeal in moving to strike the claims on which they prevailed.” The court is allowing her to move forward with her claims of defamation and false light invasion of privacy.
Neither T.I. nor Tiny have commented on the rulings, but their lawyer handling the case said he was “generally pleased with the decision.”
HipHopWired Radio
Our staff has picked their favorite stations, take a listen…
The band OK Go has reached a confidential settlement to end a bizarre legal battle with Post Foods over a new line of on-the-go cereal packages called “OK Go!”
Just months after OK Go — a power pop band best known for its viral music videos — vowed to fight back against a “big corporation” that “chose to steal the name of our band to market disposable plastic cups of sugar to children,” attorneys for both sides asked a Minnesota federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit permanently, with each side paying their own legal bills.
The filing said that the two sides had “settled this action on terms agreeable to all parties,” but did not include specific terms of the agreement in public court records, like whether the band would be paid or if Post would change the brand name. Neither side immediately returned requests for comment on Friday (June 2).
The settlement will resolve an unusual legal dispute that pitted a pop band against a multinational food company, asking the question: Will consumers who see a portable snack package of Fruity Pebbles on a supermarket shelf think that a band with a similar name had endorsed it?
The fight started in September when an attorney for the band sent a cease-and-desist letter warning Post that OK Go was “surprised and alarmed” to see Post’s new product line. He claimed the name infringed the trademark rights to the band’s name since it would “suggest to consumers that OK Go is endorsing Post’s products,” or falsely imply that the cereal company had received permission to use it.
“Our client regards this matter with the utmost seriousness and has authorized us to take all steps necessary in any venue to protect its rights,” OK Go’s attorney wrote in the September letter. “If we do not hear from you within 10 days of the date of this letter, we will assume that Post does not wish to resolve this matter amicably.”
A week later, an attorney representing Post responded, saying that the company must “respectfully disagree” with the band’s accusations. The attorney argued that rock music and breakfast cereal were “clearly unrelated” products and that the phrase “OK Go” was merely a common term that had previously been used by many other companies on their products.
In January, Post took the battle to court, asking a federal judge for what’s known as a “declaratory judgment” — meaning a pre-emptive ruling that the company did nothing wrong. Post argued that the trademark rights of a rock band like OK Go don’t extend to an unrelated product like cereal and that the new cups are clearly marked with Post’s own brand names to avoid any confusion.
“Without resolution by this court, Post will be unfairly forced to continue investing in its new OK GO! brand while under the constant threat of unfounded future litigation by defendants,” the cereal company wrote in its lawsuit.
In a statement to Billboard at the time, the members of OK Go said they’d been surprised to learn of Post’s lawsuit.
“A big corporation chose to steal the name of our band to market disposable plastic cups of sugar to children. That was an unwelcome surprise, to say the least,” the band wrote. “But then they sue US about it? Presumably, the idea is that they can just bully us out of our own name, since they have so much more money to spend on lawyers? I guess that’s often how it works, but hopefully, we’ll be the exception.”
According to Post’s lawsuit, the company had offered to pay the band as part of a “good faith effort” to resolve the dispute without resorting to litigation, despite its belief that the accusations lacked legal merit. The company claimed OK Go rejected that offer and made no counter-proposal, leaving Post with no choice but to file a lawsuit.
A former Playboy model who alleges Bill Cosby drugged and sexually assaulted her and another woman at his home in 1969 sued him Thursday under a new California law that suspends the statute of limitations on sex abuse claims.
In her lawsuit, Victoria Valentino, 80, says she was an actress and singer 54 years ago, when she met Cosby, now 85. The comedian and actor later approached her at a Los Angeles café, where he spotted her crying over the recent drowning death of her 6-year-old son.
The Associated Press does not identify people who say they have been sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly.
Cosby offered to pay for a spa treatment for Valentino and a friend, and then sent a chauffeured car to pick the women up for dinner. That evening at a steakhouse, Cosby gave them each a pill, she said in the court filing.
“Here! Take this!” the lawsuit alleges Cosby said to them. “It will make you feel better. It will make us ALL feel better.”
Cosby then drove the women to his house, where Valentino passed out on a couch, and later woke up and witnessed him sexually assaulting her unnamed friend, according to the lawsuit. The court documents allege Cosby then “engaged in forced sexual intercourse” with Valentino while she was incapacitated from the drug.
Valentino’s allegations come on the heels of lawsuits last year by six Cosby accusers in New York under a similar provision known as a “lookback” law that allows adults to file sexual abuse cases for allegations that had fallen outside the statute of limitations.
The former “Cosby Show” star, who has been accused of rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment by at least 60 women, has denied all allegations involving sex crimes. He was the first celebrity tried and convicted in the #MeToo era — and spent nearly three years at a state prison near Philadelphia before a higher court threw out the conviction and released him in 2021.
His spokesperson, Andrew Wyatt, said Thursday that Valentino’s lawsuit lacks “any proof or facts” and that so-called lookback laws violate constitutional rights aimed at protecting crime victims and “those that are accused of a crime.”
“What graveyard can Mr. Cosby visit, in order to dig up potential witnesses to testify on his behalf?” Wyatt asked in a statement. “America is continuing to see that this is a formula to make sure that no more Black Men in America accumulate the American Dream that was secured by Mr. Cosby.”
The lawsuit in LA County Superior Court was filed nearly two years after Cosby left prison when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned his 2018 sexual assault conviction. They found he gave incriminating testimony in a deposition about the encounter only after believing he had immunity from prosecution. The trial judge and an intermediate appeals court had found no evidence of such immunity.
Earlier this year, a Los Angeles jury awarded $500,000 to a woman who said Cosby sexually abused her at the Playboy Mansion when she was a teenager in 1975.
Seven other accusers received a settlement from Cosby’s insurers in the wake of the Pennsylvania conviction over a defamation lawsuit they had filed in Massachusetts. Their lawsuit said that Cosby and his agents disparaged them in denying their allegations of abuse.
Valentino’s lawsuit requests a jury trial and seeks unspecified punitive damages.
Sean “Diddy” Combs is suing alcohol giant Diageo for allegedly breaching their partnership deal for a brand of tequila, leveling accusations of racism at the company and claiming it has treated his product line “worse than others because he is Black.”
In a complaint filed Wednesday (May 31) in New York court, attorneys for the star’s Combs Wines and Spirits claimed that Diageo had “typecast” his DeLeon Tequila as a “Black brand” that could only be sold to “urban” consumers, harming its sales and potential for growth.
“Cloaking itself in the language of diversity and equality is good for Diageo’s business, but it is a lie,” Combs’ lawyers wrote. “While Diageo may conspicuously include images of its Black partners in advertising materials and press releases, its words only provide the illusion of inclusion.”
Combs claims the “unequal treatment” DeLeon has received from Diageo has left his brand lagging behind competing Diageo brands like Casamigos and Don Julio — and that the company then used those lower sales figures to offer even less support for the brand.
“Combs Wines seeks to finally put an end to Diageo’s longstanding misconduct,” the star’s lawyers wrote. “Diageo must be ordered by a court to give Combs Wines the same treatment it gives its other, successful tequila brands. It is time that Diageo’s actions match its words.”
In a statement to Billboard, a Diageo spokesperson said the company was “disappointed our efforts to resolve this business dispute amicably have been ignored, and that Mr. Combs has chosen to damage a productive and valued partnership.”
“This is a business dispute, and we are saddened that Mr. Combs has chosen to recast this matter as anything other than that,” the company said. “Our steadfast commitment to diversity within our company and the communities we serve is something we take very seriously. We categorically deny the allegations that have been made and will vigorously defend ourselves in the appropriate forum.“
In technical legal terms, the lawsuit claims that Diageo has violated a specific provision of the operating agreement that governs the Combs-Diageo joint venture that owns DeLeon. It’s not entirely clear what that provision requires — much of the legal complaint is heavily redacted — but the lawsuit claims it was included in the deal to ensure equal treatment.
“Because he knows that contracts matter more than press releases, Mr. Combs insisted that Diageo agree to certain terms to ensure his brands were not ignored or relegated to second-class status,” Combs’ lawyers wrote.
Among other alleged breaches, Combs claims Diageo violated that provision by placing DeLeon in “far fewer outlets than its other tequila brands” and failing to produce enough of it to keep store shelves stocked.
But Combs’ lawyers repeatedly stressed that their case was not simply a run-of-the-mill breach of contract lawsuit: “Similar to the realities experienced by many people of color in the United States, Diageo’s treatment of its business relationship with Mr. Combs was tainted by racial prejudices.”
At one point, Combs claims he was directly told that “things would be different if he were a white, not Black, celebrity.”
“Diageo, in other words, openly admitted that it viewed Mr. Combs merely as a Black man thatmight prove useful in marketing to Black consumers,” Combs said. “Nothing more.”
Read the entire complaint against Diageo here:
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: Yeezy Gap / Gap
The GAP has now jumped aboard the sue Kanye West train. Apparently his team made changes to a retail store without approval.
As spotted on TMZ the Chicago, Illinois native just got hit with another lawsuit. This time it is his short lived apparel partner that he severed ties with back last year. Apparently his team at Yeezy leased a property at 1360 E. 6th Street in Los Angeles, California but made several changes to the brick and mortar location that were not permissible as per the lease. Some of the unapproved alterations include constructing an exterior ramp located near the parking lot, making a tunnel in the lot, erecting a wall, uninstalling several ceiling lights and removing three bathrooms. “By making and not repairing or restoring the foregoing alterations of the premises that [West] made without Gap’s participation or approval, [West] breached the strategic agreement and directly and proximately caused Gap to incur expenses to repair and restore the premises” the lawsuit reads.
The property management agency Art City Center has since filed against The GAP and in turn The GAP is seeking Kanye to fit the bill for the damages. The two brands announced a partnership back in June 2020 but things came crashing down when Ye went full antisemite. “Antisemitism, racism and hate in any form are inexcusable and not tolerated in accordance with our values,” Gap said in a statement at the time of the scandal. But to hear Kanye tell it he left the deal on his own accord. “Everyone knows that I’m the leader, I’m the king,” West said during a CNBC interview. A king can’t live in someone else’s castle. A king has to make his own castle.”
Kanye nor a representative from his team has yet to respond to the matter.