Detective Discovered Plaintiff In Jay-Z Lawsuit Has Been Lying to the Courts

Plaintiff In Jay-Z Lawsuit Has Been Lying To The Courts To Avoid In-Person Hearings, Report

(Image: Instagram/Jay-Z)

Jay-Z‘s legal team has uncovered proof that the man at the center of an on-going lawsuit has been lying to the courts.

According to Rolling Stone, the RocNation boss hired a former NYPD sergeant to follow Donald Loftus, the man who sat at the helm of Parlux Fragrances in 2012, when  the company entered an agreement with Jay-Z. As proceedings in the company’s 2016 lawsuit against the rapper have finally gotten underway, Loftus has repeatedly argued that he was too afraid of contracting COVID to physically appear in court for his testimony.

However, the private detective saw Loftus moving about his Manhattan neighborhood freely, often without a mask. During the course of his surveillance, the officer spotted the former Parlux CEO riding public transportation, shopping, eating at local restaurants and even attending a parade.

Jay-Z’s attorney Alex Spiro has since filed a motion to enter photos of Loftus as evidence that he’s been lying about his health.

“Despite Mr. Loftus and plaintiffs’ counsel’s misrepresentations otherwise, the pandemic has not proven exceptional for Mr. Loftus, who is living his life as if it is 2019,” read the filing. “Covid-19 has not stopped Mr. Loftus from participating in any activities similar to, or more risky than, attending an in-person trial around other socially-distanced, masked individuals.”

The 2016 lawsuit stems from a 2012 deal in which Parlux contracted Jay-Z to promote a fragrance called “Gold By Jay-Z.” The company claims that his lack of involvement in efforts to promote the fragrance caused Parlux to fall far short of projected sales figures. The company had expected to bring in $15 million in the first year of sales, and $35 million in each subsequent year.

The company is seeking $18 million in compensation for the breach of contract.

Jay-Z, who is set to deliver an in-person testimony, countersued the company alleging that Parlux broke the agreement first by failing to provide the financial records and promotional resources that would have allowed him to fulfill is end of the deal.