What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Don Lemon sued Elon Musk and X Corp. in August 2024, alleging that they canceled a planned partnership for The Don Lemon Show after promising editorial control and a guaranteed first-year payment. A federal court later sent the case back to California state court, and in July 2025 a judge allowed some claims to continue while dismissing others. Neither ruling established that Musk or X committed fraud or breached a contract.
What did Lemon say happened to The Don Lemon Show deal?
Lemon’s August 1, 2024 complaint says X and Musk induced him to join a content partnership for The Don Lemon Show. It alleges that the proposed deal included editorial control and a guaranteed first-year payment of $1.5 million. These are claims in Lemon’s complaint, not terms a court has found were binding or amounts a court ordered X to pay.
The complaint centered on X canceling the planned partnership before the show launched. CBS reported that the cancellation came in March 2024, after Lemon recorded an interview with Musk for the show’s first episode and days before its planned first broadcast. Lemon also alleged that X used his name and likeness without paying him.
The complaint named Musk and X and included claims for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, misappropriation of name and likeness, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and violation of California Civil Code section 3344. The filing is reproduced by Courthouse News Service; CBS summarized the allegations and the reported deal terms in its coverage of the lawsuit.
#1 Best Overall
How did the case move between courts?
- August 1, 2024 — California state court: Lemon filed suit in San Francisco Superior Court.
- September 2024 — Federal court: Musk removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
- December 2024 — Back to state court: The federal court remanded the case to San Francisco Superior Court, finding that the defendants had not established federal jurisdiction. The remand ruling addressed whether the case could remain in federal court, not whether Lemon’s allegations were true. The ruling is reproduced by Midpage, and Courthouse News Service reported on the case returning to San Francisco.
- July 2025 — State court: Reporting said Judge Harold Kahn allowed some claims to proceed and dismissed others.
What did the July 2025 ruling decide?
TheWrap reported on July 10, 2025, that the judge allowed claims including fraud, misappropriation of name and likeness, and breach of implied contract to continue, while dismissing other claims. The report characterized the decision as allowing the lawsuit to move forward.
That is a pleading-stage outcome, not a finding that Musk or X committed wrongdoing. Allowing a claim to continue means the case may proceed on that claim; it does not prove the underlying allegation. The report does not establish a verdict or award, and the underlying ruling was not independently available in the materials cited here. Read TheWrap’s account of the July 2025 decision for its description of which claims survived.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What remains unknown about the case?
The status after the July 2025 ruling is not established by the available case information. It does not verify a later trial date, settlement, verdict, or final judgment, so none should be inferred from the ruling that claims could proceed. An April 11, 2025 state-court filing predates that decision and cannot establish what happened afterward: the filing reproduced by DocketAlarm.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
