complaint

Ye, the controversial rapper formerly known as Kanye West, faces more legal backlash amid his latest efforts to mount a comeback.

The Grammy-winning “Bully” and “All of the Lights” musician, 48, has been accused of battery and intentional inflection of distress in a lawsuit submitted Monday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. An alleged altercation in April 2024 involving Ye and a man — identified in court documents as John Doe — is at the core of the complaint. The civil suit, reviewed by The Times, accuses Ye of punching Doe in the face and repeatedly punching him while he was unconscious, leading Doe to suffer “serious” physical injuries, incur medical expenses and experience a blow to his professional reputation.

Doe seeks a jury trial and is suing for an unspecified amount in damages including loss of earnings.

A representative for Ye did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

The complaint resurfaces allegations that Ye punched a man in the late evening of April 16, 2024, in West Hollywood. At the time, TMZ reported the “Vultures” musician got physical after the unnamed man allegedly grabbed his wife, Bianca Censori, at Chateau Marmont. A spokesperson for the Los Angeles Police Department confirmed that officers had responded to the 8200 block of Sunset Boulevard at around 12:30 a.m. for a “battery investigation” but did not confirm the suspect’s identity. A representative for Ye at the time denied the rapper was a suspect in the battery case and claimed in an email that “police aren’t even investigating.”

The complaint describes the unidentified plaintiff as someone whose business relies on “personal reputation, professional relationships, and public perceptions.” Ye’s accuser is also willing to disclose his identity, the filing said, under “an appropriate protective order,” though numerous outlets reported on the victim’s suspected identity around the original incident two years ago.

According to the suit, the altercation began when Ye approached the plaintiff’s table and punched him in the face, knocking the accuser “to the ground where he hit his head and lost consciousness.” Ye allegedly proceeded to “repeatedly” punch the man as he lay on the ground, the complaint says. The plaintiff said he did nothing to provoke the rapper’s “cowardly” attack, adding that the musician “acted with malice and oppression.”

The lawsuit alleges Ye fled the scene to the protection of his security detail, leaving his accuser injured on the floor. After the incident, Ye also allegedly “falsely” accused the plaintiff of inappropriate behavior toward a woman in his party. Ye then allegedly “embellished” his claims against the plaintiff during his appearance on a “widely viewed” podcast, though the lawsuit does not explicitly name the program.

“These false statements were republished and circulated widely across social media platforms,” the lawsuit says, “exposing Plaintiff to public scorn, suspicion, and ridicule.”

In a footnote, the plaintiff clarified that his brother was also present at the time of the incident and that neither of them engaged in inappropriate conduct toward the unidentified woman. The lawsuit also mentioned the existence of video from the scene of the alleged attack.

The lawsuit said the plaintiff has suffered “severe emotional distress, including anxiety, humiliation, loss of standing in his community and harm to his professional relationships” as a result of his squabble with Ye.

The latest allegations against Ye come less than two weeks after he delivered his first full live performance in Los Angeles since 2021 at Inglewood’s SoFi Stadium on April 3. Notably, Ye fell out of public favor in recent years for a number antisemitic controversies including threatening violence to Jewish people on social media and selling T-shirts emblazoned with swastikas. He issued an apology for the scandals in January, taking out a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal that attributed his behavior to his bipolar disorder.

A California state senator alleges that police officers fabricated evidence to falsely accuse her of driving under the influence after she was T-boned at an intersection near the state Capitol.

Their motive, she claims, was discriminatory bias and a piece of legislation she wrote that law enforcement agencies did not like.

Now, she is suing the city of Sacramento alleging “a deliberate and unlawful campaign to falsely accuse, arrest, and discredit her.”

On Monday, state Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside) filed a federal lawsuit against the city as well as the police officers who cited her for driving under the influence in May. The Sacramento district attorney’s office declined to file charges after a blood test showed there were no traces of drugs or alcohol in her system.

Cervantes accuses officers of pushing forward with an arrest despite lacking probable cause and building a case against her based on false statements. She said officers submitted false information to the DMV, forcing her to retain a lawyer to stop her license from being suspended or revoked, according to the complaint.

The Riverside County legislator alleges that this conduct was in retaliation for a bill she authored seeking to restrict how law enforcement agencies store and use data from automatic license plate readers. She claims that officers discriminated against her as an LGBTQ Latina woman and provided more respectful treatment to the white woman who was at fault in the crash.

Cervantes further alleges that unknown parties within the Sacramento Police Department leaked news of her arrest to the press in a deliberate attempt to tarnish her reputation. Representatives for both the city and the Police Department said Monday that they were unable to comment on pending litigation.

“This case is about the abuse of power,” Cervantes’ attorney James Quadra said in a statement Monday. “Officers ignored the facts, fabricated evidence, and tried to turn a victim into a criminal.”

In September, Cervantes filed a government claim against the city, a necessary precursor to taking further legal action. Her lawsuit, filed in the District Court for the Eastern District of California, seeks damages for violations of federal civil rights and state law, including false arrest, unlawful search and seizure, and defamation.

The crash took place at 12:55 p.m. on May 19, 2025, when Cervantes’ car was hit by a driver who failed to yield to the right of way at an intersection in downtown Sacramento. The state senator was transported to a nearby hospital for treatment where officers met and interviewed her for hours, according to the complaint.

The complaint alleges that “despite clear damage to the vehicles showing that the other driver, a young white woman, had t-boned Senator Cervantes’ vehicle” the responding officer “treated the at-fault driver with a deference and respect which was not accorded to Senator Cervantes.”

At the hospital, one of the officers requested that Cervantes submit to a “subjective sobriety test” that included measuring her eye’s response to stimuli, according to the complaint. Cervantes said she was troubled by this request given that she broke no traffic laws and was the victim of a dangerous driver.

In order to obtain a warrant to obtain a blood draw, the officer “falsely claimed that Senator Cervantes had an unsteady gait, slurred speech, and an appearance of drowsiness,” the complaint alleges.

After news of the crash became public, a spokesperson for the Sacramento Police Department told reporters that “based on the objective signs, officers believed that Cervantes was under the influence of a central nervous system depressant.” Redacted test results Cervantes chose to share with the media showed she had a near-zero blood alcohol level, and the district attorney declined to file charges later that month.

Her lawsuit accuses parties within the Police Department of falsely telling the media she was driving under the influence “with the intent to harm Senator Cervantes because of her sponsorship of SB Bill 274 and her status as a Latina member of the LGBTQ+ community.”

The bill sought to restrict law enforcement’s use of automatic license plate readers, following concerns that the technology was being used to violate driver’s privacy and that data was being unlawfully shared with agencies outside of the state.

Civil liberty groups such as the ACLU have demanded that California police stop sharing automatic license plate reader data with out-of-state agencies that could use it to prosecute women traveling to seek abortion care.

In June, an investigation by Calmatters found that law enforcement agencies across Southern California, including the Los Angeles Police Department, violated state law by sharing information from automated license plate readers with Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Senate Bill 274 passed the state Senate and Assembly but was vetoed in October by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who sided with law enforcement agencies that expressed concerns over how the bill could hinder their ability to solve crimes.

The bill would have limited the lists agencies could use to monitor for certain cars, required enhanced data security and privacy training for officers and mandated that certain data be deleted after 60 days.

In a letter explaining his veto, Newsom wrote that the bill “failed to strike the delicate balance between protecting individual privacy and ensuring public safety.” He noted that, in instances such as cold cases, license plate data are needed to solve crimes beyond a 60-day window.

The Grammy-winning composer behind the signature opening chant in the song “Circle of Life” for “The Lion King” movies is taking a comedian to court for allegedly damaging his reputation by misrepresenting the song’s meaning on a viral podcast episode.

In a federal lawsuit filed this month seeking millions in damages, Lebohang Morake, known as Lebo M, accused Zimbabwean comedian Learnmore Jonasi of intentionally botching the translation of the lyrics, central to both the Disney films and the musical theater adaptations.

“I’m getting sued for $27 million and to make matters worse, I got served the lawsuit while I was performing,” Jonasi said in a post on social media Tuesday. The post included a clip of the comedian performing at the Laugh Factory when a manila envelope is tossed onstage.

“Right now, I’m looking for a lawyer. … I can’t believe I’m getting sued for telling a joke. What kind of stupid world do we live in?” he added.

It all started when Jonasi’s appearance on the “One54” podcast went viral late last month. In the episode of “One54” cited in the lawsuit, one of the podcast’s Nigerian hosts, Akbar Gbajabiamila, prompts the comedian with “I heard you had a problem with the ‘Lion King,’ why?” He then breaks into song, trying his hand at the chant and butchering the delivery.

“That’s not how you sing it, don’t mess up our language like that,” Jonasi says, before singing the correct lyrics in Zulu. When the hosts ask what it means, he says it translates to: “Look, there’s a lion. Oh, my God.”

The hosts erupt with laughter, saying that they’d always thought the chant was something more “beautiful and majestic.”

Jonasi often uses the same “Lion King” bit in his stand-up routines. He translates the song’s lyrics from Zulu and Xhosa, two of South Africa’s 12 national languages, and offers a broader critique on the film.

In Season 19 of “America’s Got Talent,” the comedian won over audiences by joking about how American movies about Africa often confuse Africans, asking, “Why do the lions have American accents?”

The civil lawsuit accuses Jonasi of intentionally mocking “the chant’s cultural significance with exaggerated imitations,” according to the complaint.

Disney’s official translation of the opening phrase “Nants’ingonyama bagithi Baba” is “All hail the king, we all bow in the presence of the king.”

“Hay! baba, sizongqoba,” the chant continues. It translates to “Through you we will emerge victoriously,” according to Lebo M.

Lebo M’s lawyers acknowledged in the complaint that “ingonyama” can literally translate to “lion,” but said it’s used in the song as a “royal metaphor” that invokes kingship, and that Jonasi intentionally misrepresented “an African vocal proclamation grounded in South African tradition.”

Jonasi “received a standing ovation” for a similar joke he made about the song during a March 12 stand-up performance in Los Angeles, according to the lawsuit. Such viral statements, it says, are interfering with Lebo M’s business relationships with Disney and his income from royalties, causing more than $20 million in actual damages. The lawsuit also seeks $7 million in punitive damages.

The complaint also argues that Jonasi presented his translation “as authoritative fact, not comedy,” so it shouldn’t get the 1st Amendment protections afforded to parody and satire.

Jonasi and reps for Lebo M didn’t respond to emails seeking comment, but the two have been busy on social media, making alternating statements and sub-posting each other for weeks.

Earlier this month, Jonasi revealed that he’d been receiving threats on social media for offending his fellow Africans. “It was never my intention to disrespect anybody,” he said in the video posted to Instagram. “When I went on that podcast, my intention was actually to talk about African identity. … I’d like to apologize to anybody that I hurt. But my comedy was a way to crack open a window for a conversation.”

“I had no idea the chant from ‘The Lion King’ was a royal welcoming song … I speak a little bit of Zulu, so I directly translated the words, and I even spoke to some of my South African friends, and most of them don’t even know what it means. And the rest of the world thought it was actually gibberish.”

A few days later, Lebo M posted his own Instagram video, saying he had attempted to speak with Jonasi privately, but claimed the comedian had disrespected him. “You are riding a huge wave of going viral on negativity,” he said in the video.

“I would like to encourage you to please slow down. You have a long way to go. I wish you success, but you cannot disrespect other people’s cultures that gave you the first opportunity to start with and claim it’s comedy. … You continue making a mockery of my work … the likes and the viral things won’t be there when it’s just you.”

After exchanging a few more public statements via Instagram, Jonasi was served with court papers.

He shared the news online and announced he’s selling merchandise and launching a GoFundMe to raise money for his defense. The shirts and hoodies for sale feature two different designs — one reads “Look it’s a lion,” and the other “Look it’s a lawsuit, Oh, my God.” As of Friday afternoon, Jonasi’s GoFundMe raised more than $17,000.

The tense situation seemed to be cooling on Friday morning, when Lebo M posted a lengthy statement to Instagram signaling a shift from an impending courtroom showdown to what his team is calling a “white flag moment.”

According to the post, Lebo M’s team has contacted Jonasi to “explore the possibility of a structured settlement.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Singer-songwriter FKA twigs is suing her ex-boyfriend, actor Shia LaBeouf, claiming that he is trying to “silence” her from speaking out against sexual abuse through the use of an “unlawful” nondisclosure agreement.

The complaint, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Wednesday, seeks a court order to prohibit LeBeouf from enforcing sections of an NDA which Tahliah Barnett — the Grammy Award-winning singer’s legal name — says violates California law.

“Shia LaBeouf has tried to control Tahliah Barnett for the better part of a decade,” the filing states.

“This action was taken in response to Mr. LaBeouf’s attempt to bully and intimidate twigs through a frivolous and unlawful secret arbitration he filed against her in December in which he sought to extract money from her,” said the singer’s attorney Mathew Rosengart, national co-chair of media & entertainment litigation at Greenberg Traurig in Century City, in a statement.

Rosengart added that twigs “refuses to be bullied anymore. She is instead standing up for herself and other survivors of sexual abuse who have improperly been silenced. This is the unusual case that is not about money but about justice and upholding and enforcing California law and policy designed to protect survivors by nullifying illegal NDAs.”

LaBeouf’s attorney Shawn Holley of Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir denied the claims.

“When Ms. Barnett and Mr. LaBeouf both decided to resolve their differences and move on with their lives, no one forced her or ‘bullied’ her to stay silent,” Holley said in a statement.
“As a woman with agency, she decided to settle the case and accepted money to dismiss her lawsuit.”

The suit arises out of litigation that Barnett brought against LaBeouf in 2020, when she accused the actor of “physical, sexual, and mental abuse” during their relationship,” as well as “knowingly infect[ing]” Barnett with a sexually transmitted disease.” That case was settled last year.

In a response to the suit, the actor told the New York Times that “many of these allegations are not true.”

But he added, “I am not in the position to defend any of my actions. I owe these women the opportunity to air their statements publicly and accept accountability for those things I have done.”

In the statement Thursday, Holley added that the claim of sexual battery “was disputed, as were the other claims made in Ms. Barnett’s lawsuit.”

Shia LaBeouf poses for photographers upon arrival at the premiere of the film “The Phoenician Scheme” at the 78th annual Cannes Film Festival May 18, 2025.

(Lewis Joly / Invision / AP)

According to the new lawsuit, LaBeouf filed a secret arbitration complaint and “improperly sought exorbitant monies” from Barnett last December, claiming she had breached their agreement by violating its nondisclosure provisions after she gave an interview to the Hollywood Reporter in October.

In the interview, Barnett was asked if she felt safe and answered that as a woman of color in the entertainment industry, she “wouldn’t feel safe” and discussed her involvement with organizations that support survivors, saying, “I think it’s less about me at this point and more about looking forward. Just, you know, moving on with my life.”

The agreement Barnett reached with LaBeouf “contained a deficient and unlawful NDA that is unenforceable,” under California’s Stand Together Against Non-Disclosure Act, according to the complaint. The law forbids NDAs from being used to silence victims of sexual misconduct.

“As the California Legislature has made clear, survivors should have the right to tell their stories without fear or coercion, and California law does not and must not allow abusers and bullies to silence them through secret agreements containing unconscionable, unlawful gag orders,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit further alleges that while LaBeouf has sought to prohibit Barnett from talking about her abuse, he has “repeatedly brought up his relationship with Ms. Barnett—on his own and without being directly asked about her—materially breaching the very confidentiality provisions that he had just contended were fully enforceable against Ms. Barnett.”

While the actor agreed to drop the arbitration in February, he has “refused to acknowledge, however, that the NDA provisions are illegal and unenforceable,” the filing states.

The latest round in LaBeouf’s legal battle with Barnett comes just weeks after a New Orleans judge ordered the actor to begin substance abuse treatment and undergo weekly drug testing after he was arrested on suspicion of assaulting two men in the city’s French Quarter. LaBeouf was also required to post $100,000 bond as part of the conditions of his release. He was charged with two counts of simple battery, the Associated Press reported.

ITV viewers were left saying the same thing as a new reality show debuted on Saturday night.

ITV viewers were not impressed as new reality show, Celebrity Sabotage, premiered.

The new series sees Joel Dommett, Judi Love, Sam Thompson and GK Barry sabotage ordinary people who think they are taking part in various reality shows, with the aim of winning them money.

In each episode, a fresh set of unsuspecting contestants will arrive, believing they’re participating in a brand-new ITV show. But what they don’t know is that hidden away in their very own high-tech Mission HQ are celebrity saboteurs, who are secretly watching the contestants’ every move and are being set their own sabotage missions.

Hosting the fake shows are a string of stars, including Emma and Matt Willis, Sara Davies and Clare Balding, while celebrities will also join Joel, Judi, Sam and GK to help with the sabotaging.

The first episode aired on Saturday (March 21), with a group of business enthusiasts embarking on a set of challenges under the watchful eye of entrepreneur and Dragons’ Den star Sara Davies.

The celebrity saboteurs were joined by comedian Jo Brand as they set about disrupting wedding video filming, deleting the contestant’s filmed footage, and sabotaging a wellness away-day face mask activity by using lashings of green food colouring.

After watching the first episode, several ITV viewers shared their complaints about the show’s premise.

“#CelebritySabotage This is as much fun as having a toothache, @ITV churns out some rubbish & this one is right up there. It’s a waste of our time, it makes you look forward to seeing the adverts! I’m going to sit outside & watch the car electric battery top up, a lot more fun!” one person wrote on X (formerly Twitter).

Another added: “How do programmes like these ever get commissioned. Utter rubbish,” while a third said: “What a s*** show.”

A fourth fan echoed the sentiment, saying: “This is a kids TV show that got mixed up in the schedule surely. Utterly dreadful hate watch,” with another similarly sharing: “This is appallingly bad even for ITV. How long before it’s shunted to 4.30 Sunday afternoon?”

Meanwhile, other viewers enjoyed the silliness of the show, with one person writing: “Honestly I knew I was going to like #CelebritySabotage, it’s a great show with a great cast and I really like how the fake shows are rip offs of others. Definitely will be watching next week.”