On Monday, a Los Angeles judge dismissed Jay-Z’s extortion and defamation lawsuit against lawyer Tony Buzbee. Last year, the rapper sued Buzbee, accusing the high-profile lawyer of peddling lies in one of his civil lawsuits against Sean “Diddy” Combs.
Jay-Z, born Shawn Carter, pursued legal action against Buzbee after he accused Carter of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old alongside Combs at an MTV Video Music Awards afterparty in 2000. In his lawsuit, the Roc Nation mogul claims that Buzbee tried to blackmail him in November 2024 with two demand letters requesting money. Weeks later, Carter was listed as a co-defendant in Jane Doe’s case against the rapper.
“My lawyer received a blackmail attempt, called a demand letter from a ‘lawyer’ named Tony Buzbee. What he had calculated was the nature of these allegations and the public scrutiny would make me want to settle,” Carter shared in a statement posted on December 2024. “No sir, it had the opposite effect! It made ma want to expose you for the fraud you are in a VERY public fashion. So, no I will not give you ONE RED PENNY!!”
The woman ultimately withdrew that lawsuit, accusing Carter of sexual misconduct, but Carter and his attorneys filed a separate suit against Jane Doe and her lawyer, Buzbee, in her home state, Alabama, claiming that she and her legal team knew that the allegations were false and pursued them anyway.
In a 65-page ruling, Los Angeles County Judge Mark Epstein explained that he had “come out on the side of dismissing the action, although the court is not wholly satisfied that this is the outcome that best serves the legislative and constitutional doctrines,” per the New York Times.
“There are no extraneous allegations as to publicizing other unrelated and unsavory things related to Carter, and there are no promises to refrain from going to law enforcement if Carter agrees to mediate and does settle,” Epstein continued, Rolling Stone reports. “While it is true that the alleged conduct here constitutes criminal activity, the defendants fall well short of threatening to go to the police unless Carter pays up. Selling silence as to law enforcement for money is extortion, but there is no promise of silence in the criminal context here. And selling silence for money in the civil context is not extortion; it is a settlement with a non-disclosure element.”
Carter’s lawyer, Alex Spiro said their team was “surprised and disappointed by this ruling, which turns on the misapplication of California law on the admissibility of the investigators’ statements,” noting plans to appeal. “What does it say about our justice system if someone can knowingly bring about completely false claims of the most heinous nature imaginable against an innocent individual and get away with it on a technicality?”
In an email to New York Times, Buzbee said: “The bottom line is they lose. Sending a demand letter isn’t extortion, period. We will now seek attorneys fees as allowed under California law.”
The lawyer also celebrated the case’s dismissal on X.
