Jay-Z Asks Court To Revive Extortion Case After Accuser Recants

Jane Doe’s reversal has given Jay-Z new ammunition in a California legal fight that appeared to be over. Days after the woman who once accused him of rape declared that her allegations were false, his attorneys asked an appeals court to reconsider its decision keeping his extortion and defamation claims against Tony Buzbee dismissed.

In a petition for rehearing, Jay-Z argues that Doe’s sworn declaration amounts to “explosive new evidence” that could support claims against Buzbee and his law firm. According to Billboard, his attorneys contend that the new statement justifies sending the case back to Los Angeles County Superior Court for limited discovery. “Fairness and due process require this court to grant rehearing,” the filing states.

Doe filed the declaration last week in Jay-Z’s separate New York malicious prosecution case. She now says she never met the Roc Nation founder and that her allegation against him was untrue. She also claims she began expressing doubts about her account before withdrawing the original sexual assault lawsuit in February 2025. CBS News reported that Doe denied receiving payment from Jay-Z in connection with her recantation.

California’s Second District Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of Jay-Z’s extortion and defamation claims earlier this month. Bloomberg Law reported that the panel found the lower court properly excluded recordings obtained by private investigators and correctly applied California’s anti-SLAPP law.

The appellate panel also concluded that the record did not show Buzbee knowingly advanced a false rape allegation or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Buzbee had submitted declarations describing investigations that he said led his firm to believe Doe’s account at the time. Jay-Z’s latest filing argues her recantation undercuts that reasoning and warrants another look at what Buzbee knew before publicly naming him.

Buzbee has pushed back on Doe’s new account. He told Rolling Stone that multiple lawyers heard the same allegations from her before she ever met him. One of his attorneys later characterized the recantation as “bought-and-paid-for,” though that filing offered no evidence of payment.