{"id":218356,"date":"2026-09-10T19:54:01","date_gmt":"2026-09-11T02:54:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shockya.com\/news\/?p=218356"},"modified":"2026-09-10T21:49:39","modified_gmt":"2026-09-11T04:49:39","slug":"jay-z-loses-appeal-to-tony-buzbee-in-13-year-old-girl-rape-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shockya.com\/news\/2026\/09\/10\/jay-z-loses-appeal-to-tony-buzbee-in-13-year-old-girl-rape-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Jay-Z Loses Appeal to Tony Buzbee in ’13 Year-Old Girl’ Rape Case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"Tony<\/a>
Tony Buzbee, Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs, Shawn Carter AKA Jay-Z, Marcy Croft, an abstraction of the alleged 13 year-old-girl victim, and Carter’s controversial attorney Alex Spiro. AI generated image.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

LOS ANGELES<\/strong> \u2014 A California appeals court on Wednesday upheld the dismissal of Jay-Z’s extortion and defamation<\/strong> lawsuit<\/a> against Houston attorney Tony Buzbee<\/strong>, ruling that demand letters accusing the rapper of raping two minors were protected legal communications<\/strong> and that a secretly recorded interview with his accuser was properly kept out of the case<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The unanimous ruling<\/a> by a three-judge panel of the 2nd District Court of Appeal<\/strong> affirms a June 2025 order by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mark H. Epstein<\/strong>, who struck the lawsuit under California’s anti-SLAPP law, which allows early dismissal of meritless claims arising from protected speech.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

“The record contains no evidence Buzbee accused Carter of raping Jane Doe while knowing those statements to be false or with reckless disregard as to whether they were true,” Associate Justice Anne Richardson<\/strong> wrote, referring to Jay-Z<\/strong> by his legal name, Shawn Carter<\/strong>. Justices Victoria Chavez and Stephen Goorvitch concurred.<\/strong> The opinion is not certified for publication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Buzbee <\/strong>said in an email to Courthouse News Service<\/a> that the case “was a skunk from the beginning”<\/strong> and that he would seek to recover his legal fees and costs from Carter. Carter’s attorneys did not respond to the outlet’s request for comment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n