Judge denies Kim Kardashian bid to seal $6M settlement with Ray J

Kim Kardashian has hit a new legal setback in her long-running dispute with Ray J, after a California judge refused to keep details of an alleged $6 million settlement private.

The ruling, issued on March 30 by Judge Steven A. Ellis, denied Kardashian’s request to seal a confidential agreement tied to the pair’s 2003 sex tape — a controversy that has followed both figures for over two decades, News.Az reports, citing foreign media.

According to court documents, Kardashian and her mother, Kris Jenner, failed to provide sufficient evidence that making the agreement public would cause harm.

The judge stated that their arguments about protecting privacy and business interests were “too vague” and not supported by concrete proof. As a result, the court ruled that the settlement should not be sealed.

However, Kardashian did secure a limited victory: sensitive financial details, including a bank account number referenced in the case, will remain private.

The latest development stems from a counterclaim filed by Ray J in November 2025. He alleges that both sides had agreed to a $6 million deal that included a strict condition — none of the parties would publicly discuss the 2003 tape.

That agreement reportedly involved Kardashian, Jenner, Ray J, and his mother, Sonja Norwood, and included a clause preventing any party from damaging the others’ reputation or business interests.

Ray J claims Kardashian later violated that agreement by reviving the controversy in 2021 while promoting her Hulu reality show, The Kardashians. He argues this led to renewed public attention around the tape, despite their alleged deal to avoid the topic entirely.

The dispute is part of a broader defamation lawsuit originally filed by Kardashian and Jenner against Ray J. In response, the singer filed a countersuit, accusing them of breaching their agreement.

The alleged $6 million settlement became a central piece of that legal fight, with Ray J claiming Kardashian agreed to pay the amount after mediation.

Representatives for both sides have not publicly commented on the latest court decision.

News.Az 

By Aysel Mammadzada