Sean 'Diddy' Combs Lawsuit: Ariel Mitchell Challenges Jurisdiction as Combs' Lawyers Seek to Quit

Sean “Diddy” Combs’ $100 million defamation lawsuit survived a major attempt to dismiss it less than two weeks ago.

Now one of the defendants is trying a different route — arguing Combs’ own previous representations about his Florida ties could knock the case out of federal court.

Attorney Ariel Mitchell asked a federal judge Thursday for permission to challenge the court’s jurisdiction, arguing that she and Combs were both Florida citizens when he filed the lawsuit in January 2025.

The filing came the same day three of Combs’ attorneys appeared before U.S. District Judge John P. Cronan seeking to leave the case amid a dispute over unpaid legal bills.

Together, the developments create new uncertainty around Combs’ lawsuit against Mitchell, Courtney Burgess and Nexstar Media Inc. over allegations aired on NewsNation in 2024.

Cronan on Sept. 4 rejected Mitchell’s previous attempt to dismiss the lawsuit and allowed part of Combs’ claim against Nexstar to continue.

Mitchell’s new argument is different.

Combs’ amended complaint says he “presently resides in Brooklyn, New York,” while identifying Mitchell as a Miami resident. The lawsuit relies on diversity jurisdiction, which generally requires opposing parties to be citizens of different states.

COURT FILING

The new challenge to Diddy's $100 million lawsuit

Combs v. Burgess, Mitchell & Nexstar Media Inc. • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York • Sept. 17, 2026

Ariel Mitchell argues that Sean “Diddy” Combs remained domiciled in Florida while detained in Brooklyn — and that if both were Florida citizens when the lawsuit was filed, the federal court lacked the required diversity of citizenship.

Page 3 of Ariel Mitchell's Sept. 17, 2026, federal court filing. Tap or click the document to enlarge.

“Plaintiff cannot have it both ways.” — Steven A. Metcalf II, attorney for Ariel Mitchell

WHY IT MATTERS

Mitchell says Combs relied on his Florida domicile while challenging jurisdiction in separate California litigation. She now argues that the same Florida domicile would undermine the diversity jurisdiction supporting this New York federal case.

The argument is Mitchell's. The court has not ruled that jurisdiction is lacking.

DOCUMENT 127 CASE NO. 25-CV-650 (JPC)

But Combs was in Brooklyn while being held in federal detention.

Mitchell’s attorney, Steven A. Metcalf II, argues that incarceration did not make Combs a New York domiciliary and that he remained domiciled in Florida, where he maintained a home before his arrest.

If Combs and Mitchell were both Florida citizens when the lawsuit was filed, Mitchell argues, the required diversity did not exist.

Her filing also points to separate litigation in California in which, according to Mitchell, Combs successfully relied on evidence establishing his Florida domicile while challenging that court’s jurisdiction over him.

“Plaintiff cannot have it both ways,” Metcalf wrote.

Cronan has not ruled on the argument, and Thursday’s filing is not another motion to dismiss. Mitchell is asking for permission to make the jurisdictional challenge.

It arrived as Combs faces a separate problem with his own legal team.

Attorneys Michael Tremonte, Erica Wolff and Katie Renzler of Sher Tremonte LLP have asked to withdraw, saying Combs is in “substantial arrears” on his legal bills and has not made himself available for substantive communication for months.

Combs disputes their account. He says he decided to replace the firm because it overcharged him and billed for work he had not authorized. The firm denies that allegation.

During Thursday’s conference, Wolff told Cronan that the firm still had not spoken with Combs despite another attempt to reach him. Cronan did not immediately grant the attorneys’ request to withdraw and directed them to continue attempting to reach Combs.

The jurisdiction issue also surfaced during the conference. Wolff offered a preliminary response that Combs had come to New York intending to remain there.

Mitchell, meanwhile, is asking the court to suspend her deadline to answer the lawsuit and her discovery obligations while the jurisdiction question is considered.

Her new challenge does not undo Combs’ Sept. 4 victory. Instead, it raises a more fundamental question about the surviving lawsuit: whether Combs had the legal standing to bring it in federal court in New York in the first place.

Chris Brown Tells Texas Lawmaker to ‘Keep That Award’ After Apology

U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, left, Chris Brown, center, and Texas state Rep. Venton Jones pose together after the lawmakers presented the singer with official recognitions during a stop on The R&B Tour at AT&T Stadium in Arlington, Texas, on Saturday, Sept. 12, 2026. (Photo: Venton Jones / Instagram)

Chris Brown says he never asked Texas lawmakers to honor him.

Now, after one of them apologized for participating, he wants no part of the recognition.

Brown told Texas state Rep. Venton Jones to “keep that award” after Jones apologized for presenting the R&B star with an official State of Texas legislative recognition during Brown and Usher’s concert Saturday at AT&T Stadium in Arlington.

The response capped several days of fallout from what began as a celebration of two of R&B’s biggest stars.

Jones and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett appeared during the Sept. 12 stop of "The R&B Tour"d alongside producer and songwriter RoccStar.

They brought separate recognitions.

Crockett announced a Congressional Record entry titled “Recognizing the Artistry of Chris Brown and Usher Raymond,” praising the two singers’ contributions to contemporary R&B and popular music.

Usher was not onstage during the presentation.

Jones separately presented Brown with what the Dallas lawmaker later described in his own social media post as an “official State of Texas legislative recognition” of Brown’s impact on music.

Jones credited RoccStar with helping coordinate the effort.

Crockett told the Arlington crowd they were experiencing “Black joy to the highest level” and said she wanted the moment documented in the Congressional Record.

A Congressional Record entry is a ceremonial recognition by an individual member of Congress. It is not legislation or an honor approved through a vote of Congress.

Jones initially celebrated the appearance, writing on social media the next day that it was an example of how to “mobilize voters.”

The presentation quickly drew criticism centered largely on Brown’s history of violence against women.

Brown pleaded guilty to felony assault in 2009 after attacking Rihanna, who was his girlfriend at the time. He was sentenced to five years of probation, community labor and domestic violence counseling.

Jones addressed the criticism Tuesday during an appearance on “The Don Lemon Show.”

“I want to offer an apology,” Jones said, directing his remarks to Black women, women generally and people who have experienced domestic violence.

I have been listening and reflecting. I see you and hear you.

Please accept my remarks in response.

I remain transparent and committed to House District 100, the Dallas community, and Texas, and will allow the work of the Office to continue reflecting that.

Texans, please… pic.twitter.com/0DdW37DWy5

— State Rep. Venton Jones (@VentonJonesTX) September 15, 2026

Jones said he and Crockett had been asked to participate by the venue and that their appearance was also intended to engage voters ahead of the November election.

He later expanded on the apology in a written statement, saying he had listened to people who believed his decision had contributed to circumstances in which Black women’s safety and experiences are pushed aside.

Brown rejected the apology.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Don Lemon (@donlemonofficial)

In posts on Instagram, Brown said the recognition had been brought to him rather than requested by him.

“Y’all came to me with this! Not the other way around,” Brown wrote.

Brown noted that his Arlington shows were already sold out.

While Brown accused the lawmaker of pandering, Jones maintained that his apology followed conversations with constituents and reflection on the criticism.

Brown ultimately told Jones he no longer wanted the recognition and said he wanted to be left alone to concentrate on the fans supporting his tour.

His response to Crockett was markedly different.

Before Jones’ apology, Brown posted a photograph of himself embracing the congresswoman and thanked her for the recognition. He also apologized for any backlash she might receive and said that although he was not political, he was grateful for the gesture.

Crockett’s Congressional Record recognition included Usher as well as Brown, despite Usher’s absence from that portion of the onstage presentation.

Jones’ state recognition was specifically for Brown.

Ye Could Face Up to $23 Million Claim as Donda Academy Case Nears Trial

FILE — Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, is shown in a file photograph. The hip-hop artist and entrepreneur could face up to $23 million in potential damages in an ongoing racial discrimination lawsuit filed by a former security employee of Donda Academy and Yeezy LLC, according to newly reported court documents. (Photo: Phil Romans / Flickr via CC BY-SA 2.0)

A former Donda Academy employee is seeking up to roughly $23 million in damages in his discrimination lawsuit against Kanye West as the two-year-old case moves toward trial, according to newly filed court papers.

Benjamin Provo, a Black former security guard who sued the artist, Yeezy LLC and Donda Academy in 2024, has outlined damages he contends could reach approximately $23 million if he prevails, according to court documents obtained by TMZ.

The figure is not a judgment or settlement, and no court has determined that West, who legally changed his name to Ye in 2021, owes Provo that amount.

Provo's lawsuit alleges he faced racial and religious discrimination while working at Donda Academy and Yeezy and was ultimately fired after refusing a demand to cut his dreadlocks, which he has said he wore in part as an expression of his Muslim faith.

Ye and the other defendants have denied wrongdoing.

Provo filed the lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court in April 2024, accusing Ye and members of his management team of treating Black employees less favorably than white workers.

The complaint alleges Ye frequently screamed at and berated Black employees while treating white employees differently. Provo also alleges that Ye began demanding that employees shave their heads.

According to the complaint, Provo was eventually told that Ye wanted "the one with the dreads" to shave his head or be fired. Provo alleges he refused and subsequently lost his job.

The lawsuit extends beyond Provo's hair.

Provo alleges that Ye expressed displeasure with prominent Black leaders and ordered people associated with Donda to dispose of books related to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X and other Black figures.

The newly reported court papers also offer a glimpse at testimony gathered as the case moved toward trial.

Provo's latest filing cites deposition testimony from former Yeezy chief of staff Milo Yiannopoulos concerning racially charged remarks and the provocative way Ye discussed religion in the workplace.

That testimony comes as the two sides fight over what evidence may be considered at trial.

Ye's attorneys have asked the court to exclude social media posts attributed to Ye and Yiannopoulos, arguing that much of the material is irrelevant to whether Provo experienced unlawful discrimination during his employment.

The defense filing includes a 919-page report containing social media material that Provo may seek to use at trial. Ye's attorneys contend that some of the posts came from impersonation, parody or other accounts and have argued that Provo should be required to establish the authenticity, relevance and admissibility of disputed material before it is considered.

Another pretrial dispute centers on whether Ye's mental condition during the period covered by the lawsuit has any relevance to the case.

Provo's attorneys have asked the court to prevent Ye's side from arguing that he was of unsound mind, contending that such a defense was not raised in the defendants' answer and that Ye did not produce medical records or designate an expert witness to support such an argument during discovery.

Ye's attorneys have separately asked the court to exclude evidence concerning any alleged mental unfitness, noting that Ye testified during a deposition that he considered himself mentally fit.

Ye has also disputed Provo's characterization of their employment relationship, arguing in court papers that Provo worked for a third-party company that provided workers rather than directly for Ye or his companies.

The $23 million figure represents Provo's calculation of potential damages, not money that has been awarded by the court.

A nonjury trial is currently scheduled for Oct. 12 in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Ye's attorneys have asked Judge Brock T. Hammond to postpone it until May 17, 2027, or another date available to the court and Provo.