In January 2025, Noushin Faraji, a former hairstylist at Fox Sports, filed a lawsuit against the network and several individuals, including former host Skip Bayless. Faraji alleges that Bayless subjected her to repeated unwanted advances, including lingering hugs, kisses on the cheek, and inappropriate comments about her appearance. The most egregious claim involves Bayless offering her $1.5 million for sexual favors, which she refused. Following her rejection, Faraji contends that Bayless's behavior became increasingly hostile, culminating in false accusations that she was involved in a sexual relationship with his co-host, Shannon Sharpe.

The lawsuit further alleges that Faraji endured a workplace environment at Fox Sports characterized by misogyny, racism, and ableism, where executives and on-air talent engaged in abusive behavior without fear of repercussions. Faraji claims that after reporting these incidents to Human Resources, she faced retaliation, including fabricated reasons leading to her termination in 2024. Additionally, the suit includes allegations against other Fox Sports personnel, such as executive Charlie Dixon, accused of groping Faraji at a social event. Faraji is seeking unspecified monetary damages and a jury trial, asserting claims of sexual battery, hostile work environment, failure to prevent harassment, and wrongful termination.


(commercial at 8:29)

to contact me:

[email protected]

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.

The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdf

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.

The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdf

​In the case of Burrowes v. Smalls et al., filed in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 25-1618, plaintiff Kirk Burrowes brings a civil action against defendants including Janice Smalls (also known as Janice Combs), James Doe 1, Lawyer Doe 1, ABC Company 1, John and Jane Does 1-10, and ABC Corporations 1-10. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in actions that caused harm to the plaintiff, leading to the pursuit of legal remedies.

​Kirk Burrowes, co-founder and former president of Bad Boy Entertainment, has filed a lawsuit against Janice Combs (also known as Janice Smalls), alleging her involvement in a scheme to unlawfully seize his 25% stake in the company. The complaint asserts that in 1996, Sean "Diddy" Combs, accompanied by the company's attorney, Kenneth Meiselas, confronted Burrowes with a baseball bat, coercing him into signing over his ownership stake to Janice Combs. Burrowes claims that this act was part of a broader plan orchestrated by Janice Combs to gain full control of Bad Boy Entertainment, employing tactics of intimidation, violence, and financial deception. He further alleges that following this incident, he was blacklisted from the music industry, resulting in financial ruin and homelessness. Burrowes is seeking damages for financial losses, reinstatement of his ownership interest, and a forensic audit of the company's financial records since its inception.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

burrowes-v-janice-combs-1-25-cv-01618-feb-2025.pdf

​In the case of Burrowes v. Smalls et al., filed in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 25-1618, plaintiff Kirk Burrowes brings a civil action against defendants including Janice Smalls (also known as Janice Combs), James Doe 1, Lawyer Doe 1, ABC Company 1, John and Jane Does 1-10, and ABC Corporations 1-10. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in actions that caused harm to the plaintiff, leading to the pursuit of legal remedies.

​Kirk Burrowes, co-founder and former president of Bad Boy Entertainment, has filed a lawsuit against Janice Combs (also known as Janice Smalls), alleging her involvement in a scheme to unlawfully seize his 25% stake in the company. The complaint asserts that in 1996, Sean "Diddy" Combs, accompanied by the company's attorney, Kenneth Meiselas, confronted Burrowes with a baseball bat, coercing him into signing over his ownership stake to Janice Combs. Burrowes claims that this act was part of a broader plan orchestrated by Janice Combs to gain full control of Bad Boy Entertainment, employing tactics of intimidation, violence, and financial deception. He further alleges that following this incident, he was blacklisted from the music industry, resulting in financial ruin and homelessness. Burrowes is seeking damages for financial losses, reinstatement of his ownership interest, and a forensic audit of the company's financial records since its inception.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

burrowes-v-janice-combs-1-25-cv-01618-feb-2025.pdf

​In the case of Burrowes v. Smalls et al., filed in the Southern District of New York under Index No. 25-1618, plaintiff Kirk Burrowes brings a civil action against defendants including Janice Smalls (also known as Janice Combs), James Doe 1, Lawyer Doe 1, ABC Company 1, John and Jane Does 1-10, and ABC Corporations 1-10. The complaint alleges that the defendants engaged in actions that caused harm to the plaintiff, leading to the pursuit of legal remedies.

​Kirk Burrowes, co-founder and former president of Bad Boy Entertainment, has filed a lawsuit against Janice Combs (also known as Janice Smalls), alleging her involvement in a scheme to unlawfully seize his 25% stake in the company. The complaint asserts that in 1996, Sean "Diddy" Combs, accompanied by the company's attorney, Kenneth Meiselas, confronted Burrowes with a baseball bat, coercing him into signing over his ownership stake to Janice Combs. Burrowes claims that this act was part of a broader plan orchestrated by Janice Combs to gain full control of Bad Boy Entertainment, employing tactics of intimidation, violence, and financial deception. He further alleges that following this incident, he was blacklisted from the music industry, resulting in financial ruin and homelessness. Burrowes is seeking damages for financial losses, reinstatement of his ownership interest, and a forensic audit of the company's financial records since its inception.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

burrowes-v-janice-combs-1-25-cv-01618-feb-2025.pdf

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07778-JLR, the Combs defendants have filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the complaint brought against them. The defense argues that the plaintiff's allegations are legally insufficient, lacking the necessary factual specificity to substantiate claims of misconduct. They contend that the complaint relies heavily on conclusory statements and unsubstantiated assertions, failing to meet the required pleading standards. Furthermore, the defendants assert that certain claims are time-barred due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, rendering them ineligible for legal action.

Additionally, the memorandum challenges the applicability of specific statutes cited in the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff has misinterpreted or misapplied these laws in an attempt to support their claims. The defense emphasizes that the plaintiff has not demonstrated a direct causal link between the defendants' actions and any alleged harm suffered. They also highlight procedural deficiencies, such as the failure to properly serve all parties involved, which they claim undermines the court's jurisdiction over the matter. In light of these arguments, the Combs defendants request that the court dismiss the complaint in its entirety, asserting that it fails to establish a viable legal basis for proceeding.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.49.0.pdf

In January 2025, Sean "Diddy" Combs filed a $50 million defamation lawsuit against Courtney Burgess, attorney Ariel Mitchell, and Nexstar Media Group, the parent company of NewsNation. The lawsuit alleges that Burgess falsely claimed to possess videos depicting Combs engaging in sexual assaults involving celebrities and minors—claims that were subsequently amplified by Mitchell and broadcasted by NewsNation without proper verification. Combs asserts that these allegations are entirely fabricated and have caused significant harm to his reputation and economic interests.


Combs' legal team contends that the defendants' actions were part of a deliberate effort to damage his public image and undermine his right to a fair trial, especially in light of his upcoming court proceedings on unrelated charges. Attorney Erica Wolff emphasized that such intentional falsehoods, which have poisoned public perception and contaminated the jury pool, will no longer be tolerated. The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages, aiming to hold the defendants accountable for the alleged dissemination of malicious falsehoods.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Combs v. Burgess Complaint v.3.pdf

​Denise George, a seasoned attorney from the U.S. Virgin Islands, served as the territory's Attorney General from 2019 until her dismissal in December 2022. During her tenure, she was recognized for her unwavering commitment to justice, notably leading significant legal actions against the estate of Jeffrey Epstein.

In early 2020, George filed a civil enforcement lawsuit against Epstein's estate under the Virgin Islands' Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (CICO). This legal action aimed to hold Epstein's estate accountable for alleged criminal activities, including human trafficking and sexual exploitation within the Virgin Islands. Her efforts culminated in a settlement in November 2022, wherein the estate agreed to pay the Virgin Islands over $105 million and half of the proceeds from the sale of Little St. James, Epstein's private island.


to contact me:

[email protected]

​Prince Andrew's association with Jeffrey Epstein significantly strained his relationship with Queen Elizabeth II and the broader royal family. Despite the Queen's deep affection for her son, the mounting public and media scrutiny compelled her to take decisive action to protect the monarchy's reputation. In November 2019, following a widely criticized BBC Newsnight interview where Andrew attempted to explain his ties to Epstein, he announced his withdrawal from public duties with the Queen's consent. This decision marked a pivotal moment, reflecting the severity of the situation and the necessity to distance the royal institution from the scandal. ​

The repercussions of Andrew's involvement with Epstein extended further. In January 2022, amid a civil lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre alleging sexual assault, the Queen stripped Andrew of his military affiliations and royal patronages. This move underscored the monarchy's commitment to accountability, even when it concerned close family members. Although Andrew settled the lawsuit out of court in February 2022, his public image suffered irreparable damage. Throughout these challenges, Queen Elizabeth maintained a delicate balance between her roles as a mother and the sovereign, supporting her son privately while upholding the integrity of the Crown publicly.


to contact me:

[email protected]