Kevin Hart is disputing the claims of a former friend who says the comedian has yet to pay for arbitration of their dispute regarding the fallout from the actor’s former 2017 sex-tape controversy, which the plaintiff contends is grounds to send the case back to court.
The Los Angeles Superior Court lawsuit brought by Jonathan “J.T.” Jackson alleges Hart did not use the language they had agreed upon in a July 2021 settlement when Hart addressed their differences on social media in October of that year. Jackson sued Hart and the entertainer’s loan-out company, Hartbeat LLC, last July 10.
So, in a hearing scheduled for April 30, Jackson asks that Hart be forced to live up to his alleged March 7 commitment to pay the arbitration fees, including the initial $6,750 cost to begin the process, “or else defendants are deemed to have waived arbitration and this case will be restored to the court’s active docket.”
But in court papers filed Thursday with Judge Daniel Murphy, Hart’s attorneys say Jackson’s motion is moot.
“Hart agreed to cover the costs and fees of arbitration, has paid the administrative filing fee, has submitted his arbitration demand and (the arbitration company) Signature has acknowledged that Hart is responsible for 100% of the fees associated with the matter,” according to the comedian’s lawyers’ pleadings.
Jackson’s attorneys further contend that Jackson brought the motion “in transparent hope that the court will deem the defendants to have waived arbitration so that Jackson can utilize the court to publicly smear Hart and Hartbeat, as he already attempted to do by filing this action in court rather than arbitration.”
Jackson chose retired Judge Joyce Fahey for the arbitration and his lawyers stated in their court papers that she charges $1,000 an hour and has an initial retainer fee of $10,000, according to Hart’s attorneys, who add that their client has nonetheless agreed to pay the full costs.
In their court papers, Hart’s attorneys also deny claims by Jackson’s counsel that the comedian has been communicating with his former assistant Miesha Shakes, regarding a proposed settlement agreement that would limit her ability to speak with Jackson.
“Hartbeat has not communicated with Shakes, is not a party to any agreement with Shakes and is not a party to any purported negotiations between Hart and Shakes,” according to a footnote in Hart’s lawyers’ court papers. “Indeed, the exhibits plaintiff cites to imply that Hartbeat is communicating with Shakes show nothing to support his lie.”
Arbitration came into play when the judge granted Hart’s motion to compel the procedure during a hearing in October. According to Hart’s lawyers, Jackson’s allegations involve a written contract between him and the company in which both sides agreed to mandatory arbitration of any “controversy, claim or dispute.”
The judge agreed and also placed a stay on the case pending an Aug. 14, 2025, status conference.
In 2018, Jackson was charged with attempting to extort the married Hart by allegedly threatening to make public a video of the performer having sex with another woman, but the criminal case was dropped three years later.
In July 2021, Jackson and Hart settled their disputes and Hart agreed to make a public statement of exoneration, leaving Jackson with the hope he would be able to overcome the negative publicity from the criminal accusations, the suit stated.
Hart, however, “blatantly breached the contract by failing to issue the agreed-upon public statement exonerating plaintiff, causing significant harm and irreparable damage to plaintiff’s reputation,” the suit alleges.