A judge is motioning for JAY-Z‘s defamation lawsuit against Tony Buzbee to proceed as alleged evidence shows the Houston attorney sharing and liking incriminating posts on X.
RELATED: Tony Buzbee Drops Sexual Assault Lawsuit Against Jay-Z And Diddy
According to Rolling Stone, on Tuesday (February 25), a judge in Los Angeles ordered that JAY-Z’s defamation lawsuit against high-profile attorney Tony Buzbee will be allowed to proceed to trial.
In the tentative ruling, Judge Mark H. Epstein said he believed there was enough merit behind the question about Bubzee behaving recklessly and acting with malice when he named JAY-Z, born Shawn Carter, as a defendant in his client’s sexual assault last December. The suit, which was dismissed on February 14, also named Diddy, born Sean Combs, as the first assailant and primary.
RELATED: Jay-Z Files Lawsuit Against Attorney Tony Buzbee For False Rape
The publication reports that Judge Mark H. Epstein is the same justice who previously looked to dismiss the rap mogul’s extortion claims against Buzbee. However, following the two-hour hearing, the judge declined to make a final ruling. He claimed that he needed additional time to sit with the oral arguments from the lawyers on each side.
Furthermore, in the judge’s tentative ruling, he found that JAY-Z’s defamation claims against Tony Buzbee had enough basis to move forward with supporting evidence. Reportedly, Hov’s legal team has evidence of Buzbee referring to his client, Jane Doe, as a “sexual assault survivor.” The claim was made in a social media post on November 18, 2024.
JAY-Z’s Legal Team Argues Tony Buzbee Shared And ‘Liked’ Posts Defaming Rap Mogul
Hov’s legal team also reportedly has evidence of Buzbee “liking” a post on X, formerly Twitter, one day later. That alleged post reportedly speculated that JAY-Z was the John Doe described in the woman’s sexual assault lawsuit. In a Santa Monica, California courtroom, Judge Epstein told Buzbee’s lawyers:
“When someone says Doe is Carter, and [Buzbee] ‘likes’ it, it’s not unreasonable to infer that [Buzbee] has just affirmed that he’s right, that Doe is Carter.”
Judge Epstein also told Buzbee’s lawyers that the social media posts were damning enough for the case to move forward. He added that JAY-Z’s celebrity status and public interest in the case meant that he had to prove “actual malice.”
The judge continued to slam Buzbee for failing to conduct a thorough investigation into his client and for “expressly stating” that his client was properly investigated before filing a lawsuit with “an inferior investigation.” The judge said:
“Not having done the investigation we’d all like one to do is not going to be enough to show actual malice, I know that. The concern I have is juxtaposing that with Mr. Buzbee’s statements that he was not going to bring a lawsuit until he had done a full investigation.
I agree this is the hardest question of the case, the ‘actual malice’ question. If you say, ‘I’m not going to name names until I’ve done real investigating,’ and then you name a name, isn’t the implication that you did conduct a real investigation? And if you didn’t, is it okay? Is actual malice still not satisfied when I’m telling the public, ‘I did a real investigation and this guy engaged in child rape,’ and actually, I didn’t?”
#Socialites, be sure to check out the post below, then leave us your thoughts in a comment after!
