Sean Combs’s defamation case against NewsNation’s parent company, Nexstar Media Inc., lawyer Ariel Mitchell, and Courtney Burgess remains active. In a September 4, 2026 ruling, the court let the claim tied to one statement proceed against Nexstar and denied Mitchell’s motion to dismiss; it did not find that any defendant was liable. The amended complaint seeks at least $100 million—not the $50 million in the original headline framing—and discovery was stayed by a September 17 order.
Who Combs sued and what he is seeking
Combs filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.), case 1:25-cv-00650, against Courtney Burgess, Ariel Mitchell, and Nexstar Media Inc. NewsNation is the channel associated with Nexstar; Nexstar Media Inc. is the corporate defendant named in the case. The Associated Press reported the lawsuit on January 23, 2025. Associated Press report.
The amended complaint, filed August 11, 2025, asserts one defamation cause of action against all three defendants and seeks damages of at least $100 million, according to the court’s September 4, 2026 opinion. That is the operative demand described in the opinion; it is a request for damages, not an award. Amended complaint (Document 61); September 4 opinion.
The $50 million figure in the earlier headline does not match the amount sought in the amended complaint. The court’s opinion identifies the later, amended demand as at least $100 million.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
What statements are at issue
The court summarized seven statements that Combs’s amended complaint characterizes as defamatory. They concern allegations that videos showed Combs sexually assaulting celebrities and minors; that he secretly recorded sexual partners; that recordings were used to threaten or extort partners; that a police report corroborated an alleged 2018 rape; that drug-laced baby oil was used to incapacitate people; that Burgess was in danger because he possessed videos and a memoir; and that Combs had harmed “hundreds, maybe thousands of people.”
Those are allegations described in the complaint, not findings by the court that the statements were false, that an assault or other conduct occurred, or that any defendant acted unlawfully. The court considered allegations assumed true only for the limited purpose of deciding the motions to dismiss.
Rank #2
What the September 4, 2026 ruling decided
Judge John P. Cronan ruled on dismissal motions, not the ultimate truth of the allegations. The outcome differed by defendant and by statement:
| Defendant | September 4 outcome | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Nexstar Media Inc. | Motion granted in part and denied in part | The complaint did not plausibly allege actual malice for three of the four statements asserted against Nexstar: the alleged assault videos, secret recordings, and purported corroborating police report. The claim tied to the baby-oil statement survived at this stage. |
| Ariel Mitchell | Motion denied in full | The claims against Mitchell were not dismissed by this ruling. The denial is not a finding of liability. |
| Courtney Burgess | No ruling on a dismissal motion | Burgess had not appeared, and the opinion did not decide the claim against him. |
For the surviving claim against Nexstar, the judge explained that the ruling addressed only whether the allegations were sufficient to proceed: “Of course, none of this is to say that Combs ultimately will prevail against Nexstar as to Statement 5, but for purposes of the present motion, his allegation of actual malice suffices to survive Rule 12(b)(6).” S.D.N.Y. opinion, Document 122.
PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteWhy surviving a motion to dismiss is not a verdict
A motion to dismiss tests whether a complaint sufficiently alleges a legally viable claim under the applicable pleading standard. When a claim survives, it may proceed; the ruling does not establish that the underlying allegation is true, resolve disputed facts, or determine damages. Likewise, dismissing portions of a claim at this stage is not a trial finding about every disputed event. The September 4 opinion therefore narrowed what could proceed against Nexstar while leaving the relevant claim against Mitchell intact, without deciding ultimate liability.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Discovery is stayed, and a representation-status deadline is pending
On September 17, 2026, the court ordered discovery stayed pending further order. It also adjourned deadlines concerning responses to Mitchell’s pre-motion letter, defendants’ responses to the amended complaint, and reconsideration of the September 4 opinion. Mitchell’s letter anticipated a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; the September 17 order did not itself decide that anticipated motion.
Rank #4
The same order directed Combs’s counsel to submit a status letter by October 19, 2026, stating whether Combs intended to proceed without counsel or retain new counsel. As of October 8, 2026, that deadline was still in the future. The order noted a motion by counsel to withdraw but did not grant it. S.D.N.Y. order, Filing 128.
Quick Recap
Best Value
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.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors
