Overview
- Filed Sept. 24, the motion in the Central District of California asks the court to bar further non-party deposition or narrow discovery under Rule 26(c).
- The filing cites undue burden, constitutional risks, and potential prejudice to Lanez’s ongoing appeal if additional testimony is compelled.
- Lanez underscores that he is not a party to Pete v. Cooper in the Southern District of Florida, where the defamation suit proceeds against blogger Milagro Gramz.
- His attorneys contend he received harsher deposition treatment than DJ Akademiks and Caesar McDowell, pointing to what they call unequal practices.
- In parallel, Megan Thee Stallion’s lawyers are seeking to compel DJ Akademiks to disclose an anonymous source for sealed records, and a court previously ordered Lanez to sit for a second deposition after a disruptive first session.