Jay-Z has asked a California appeals court to reconsider its dismissal of his extortion and defamation lawsuit against attorney Tony Buzbee. The rapper, whose legal name is Shawn Carter, filed the petition for rehearing after the woman who accused him recanted her claims on Sept. 24.
The petition goes to California’s Second Appellate District. The panel ruled against Carter on Sept. 9, and TMZ reported the petition on Sept. 28, 19 days later. Buzbee’s attorney called the recantation “bought-and-paid-for.” The woman’s own statement says no one paid her.
What Jay-Z’s Petition Argues
Carter’s lawyers say the accuser’s retraction is new evidence that justifies sending the case back for limited discovery. Their filing says the declaration “proves that discovery would yield evidence supporting Carter’s claims,” according to Complex. They also argue that Buzbee pushed to drop the woman’s suit “to protect himself from sanctions” and that her stated reason was protection from harassment and invasion of privacy, TMZ reported.
TMZ posted its story Sept. 28. Law Commentary and DancehallMag published theirs Sept. 29. Carter is asking for the chance to take discovery into how Buzbee handled the original allegations and, if the evidence supports it, to go to trial, according to TMZ. The petition asks for “limited discovery on remand.”
What the Accuser Now Says
The woman sued as Jane Doe. Her lawsuit alleged that Sean “Diddy” Combs and a second man assaulted her after the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards. An amended complaint named Carter as the second man. Carter strongly denied the allegation from the start, CelebrityAccess reported.
On Sept. 24, she issued a statement saying she never met Carter and that no one threatened her. She also denied being paid to say so, DancehallMag reported. Law Commentary reported that she made the denial in a sworn declaration filed in Manhattan federal court.
Her new attorney, James Blair Newman Jr., told TMZ she was “entirely mistaken in her allegations identifying Mr. Carter.” The same statement said she still maintains she was the victim of a sexual assault. It added that she apologizes to Carter and his family.
How Buzbee’s Side Responded
Jessica Meyers, an attorney for Buzbee, called the declaration “bought-and-paid-for”, according to Law Commentary. Doe’s statement says no one paid her. Law Commentary reported that Meyers offered no evidence that anyone paid Doe. Buzbee said several lawyers had dealt with Doe before he did and that she gave them the same account, per Law Commentary. TMZ said Buzbee had not responded to its request for comment.
What the Sept. 9 Ruling Decided
The petition asks the court to revisit a decision that went against Carter on several grounds. Sheppard, the law firm that represented Buzbee, announced the Sept. 9 ruling in a Sept. 10 press release. It lists the case as Shawn Carter v. The Buzbee Law Firm et al., No. B347898, decided by the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Two.
The panel upheld a June 2025 anti-SLAPP ruling by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mark H. Epstein. The dismissal covered the extortion, defamation and emotional distress claims. The court held that Buzbee’s demand letters were protected pre-litigation communications under the litigation privilege.
It also upheld the trial court’s finding that Carter failed to establish the elements of his defamation claims. Camille Vasquez, a Sheppard partner who led Buzbee’s team, said the decision was a “complete vindication” for Buzbee and his firm.
The panel heard oral argument on Aug. 20, 20 days before it ruled, Bloomberg Law reported. The justices were Stephen Goorvitch, Victoria Chavez and Anne Richardson. Bloomberg Law said the argument centered on private investigators’ recordings of an accuser recanting, which the trial court had excluded. Goorvitch voiced skepticism about where the recordings came from.
Jeremy Rosen of Horvitz & Levy, arguing for Carter, said the trial court acknowledged the exclusion prejudiced Carter and asked for limited discovery into the recordings’ source. Samuel Moniz of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, arguing for Buzbee, said the investigators coerced the woman by threatening to expose her identity unless she recanted. Bloomberg Law reported that the panel signaled it was inclined to affirm.
Bloomberg Law reported that Carter characterizes the withdrawn suit as an extortion scheme that followed Combs’s 2024 federal indictment on sex trafficking charges.
What the Rehearing Petition Has to Show
The appeals panel did not decide whether the accusation was true. As CelebrityAccess reported, the panel found no evidence that Buzbee made the accusation while knowing it was false or ignoring whether it was true. DancehallMag reported that the rehearing question turns on whether a later recantation shows Buzbee knew the claim was false when he filed it. That is a separate matter from whether the claim was false.
A recantation in 2026 speaks to the accuser’s account. It does not by itself show what Buzbee’s firm knew when it sent the demand letters. Carter’s lawyers are asking for discovery for that reason. They want the chance to look for evidence of what Buzbee knew.
The trial court had excluded recordings that Carter’s private investigators made of an accuser, and Bloomberg Law reported that the exclusion was the central dispute at oral argument. Carter has said the allegations cost his business $20 million, per Complex. That figure is his own claim.
Timeline of the Case
The dates show how late the recantation arrived. Law Commentary and CelebrityAccess both said the accuser’s lawsuit was dismissed in February 2025. Epstein granted Buzbee’s anti-SLAPP motion in June 2025, per Sheppard, which is more than a year before the appeals panel ruled.
The panel ruled Sept. 9. The accuser’s statement followed 15 days later, on Sept. 24. TMZ reported the petition four days after that, 19 days after the ruling. The recantation came after the panel had ruled on the record it had, and the petition asks the same panel to weigh evidence that did not exist when it decided.
Carter’s Separate New York Case
The petition does not touch Carter’s separate malicious prosecution claim against Buzbee, which CelebrityAccess and Law Commentary both placed in New York federal court. That case remains open.
The federal docket shows how it got there. Carter filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama on March 3, 2025, as case 1:25-cv-00086. A Justia copy of the March 31, 2026 order shows Judge Terry F. Moorer found the Buzbee defendants were subject to specific personal jurisdiction in Alabama but that venue was improper there. He transferred the whole case to the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
The complaint there is broader than the California one. It names attorneys Anthony Buzbee and David Fortney, Anthony G. Buzbee LP, New York attorney Antigone Curis and Curis Law PLLC, along with a defendant listed as Jane Doe, whom Carter dismissed from the case last week, per Law Commentary. The claims are malicious prosecution, abuse of process, civil conspiracy and defamation. Buzbee told CelebrityAccess he is “now entitled to my fees and costs.” Sheppard’s release did not disclose an amount.
