%20(9)_1768600995.jpeg)
Los Angeles, California – January 17, 2026 — In a landmark ruling that brings a definitive close to over a decade of litigation, a federal judge in the Central District of California has dismissed a paternity lawsuit against music mogul Jay-Z (born Shawn Corey Carter) with prejudice and ordered the plaintiff to pay approximately $119,235.45 in attorney's fees and costs. The decision, finalized and widely reported on January 15, 2026, marks the official end of claims by Rymir Satterthwaite, who alleged that the 25-time Grammy winner is his biological father.
The case, rooted in allegations dating back to the early 1990s, stemmed from claims by Satterthwaite's late mother, Wanda Satterthwaite. She asserted in affidavits and court documents that she became pregnant with Rymir after a brief encounter with Jay-Z in 1992–1993, when she was 16 years old and he was in his early 20s. Wanda Satterthwaite initially filed a child support petition in New Jersey in 2010, but the case was dismissed in 2012 due to jurisdictional issues, as the court determined it had been filed in the wrong state.
Following Wanda's terminal illness and subsequent death in 2016 from heart-related complications, her friend and Rymir's godmother, Lillie Coley—a paralegal who had assumed legal guardianship over Rymir in 2011—continued the pursuit. Coley and Rymir refiled related actions in 2014, with the matter gaining public attention in 2015 amid accusations that Jay-Z had misrepresented facts to avoid a DNA test. Over the years, the dispute involved multiple motions, amendments, dismissals, and appeals across state and federal courts, including the New Jersey Supreme Court.
In 2023, Rymir Satterthwaite, now 31 and an aspiring musician, filed his own federal paternity lawsuit seeking to compel Jay-Z to submit to DNA testing. He repeatedly emphasized that his motivation was personal closure and identity rather than financial gain or fame. However, in July 2025, Satterthwaite voluntarily withdrew that suit with prejudice, meaning it could not be refiled. He later indicated that the fight was "far from over," but no further action materialized from him directly.
Coley then advanced a separate 2025 complaint in California federal court, alleging that Jay-Z had committed fraud, intentionally inflicted emotional distress, and colluded with state officials to suppress evidence and block proceedings. She claimed these actions caused her severe financial hardship, including bankruptcy and property threats, and accused the rapper of using his influence to evade responsibility.
Jay-Z's legal team consistently denied the allegations, describing the litigation as a "prolonged campaign of harassment" and pointing out that no court had ever ordered a DNA test or found merit in the underlying paternity claims. They argued that the filings were baseless and retaliatory, protected under California's anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute—a law designed to shield individuals from meritless lawsuits intended to intimidate or silence protected speech and petition rights.
In November 2025, U.S. District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett granted Jay-Z's motion to dismiss Coley's complaint without leave to amend, effectively ending the case with prejudice. The judge determined that the claims arose from statements and conduct in prior litigation, falling squarely within anti-SLAPP protections. On January 13, 2026, Judge Garnett denied Coley's motion for reconsideration and ruled that Jay-Z was "entitled to recover" the specified attorney's fees and costs from Coley.
The final fee award, totaling $119,235.45, was confirmed and reported across multiple outlets on January 15–16, 2026. This outcome underscores the court's view that the persistent legal efforts lacked substantive basis and imposed undue burden on the defendant.
Jay-Z, 56, has long maintained his denial of paternity and has never been compelled to undergo testing in any related proceeding. The rapper, a billionaire entrepreneur through ventures like Roc Nation, Tidal, and Armand de Brignac champagne, shares three children—Blue Ivy (born 2012) and twins Rumi and Sir (born 2017)—with his wife, Beyoncé. He has faced no public comment on the latest ruling from his representatives, though his attorneys have previously highlighted the repeated judicial rejections as vindication.
For Satterthwaite and Coley, the decision represents a permanent bar on refiling similar claims in this jurisdiction. Satterthwaite has been active on social media since early 2026, posting to dispute the validity of the sanctions and anti-SLAPP application, but no appeals or new filings have been reported as of mid-January.
Legal experts note that anti-SLAPP statutes, while varying by state, serve as powerful deterrents against frivolous or harassing litigation, particularly in high-profile cases involving celebrities. The prolonged nature of this dispute—spanning more than 15 years from the initial 2010 filing—highlights challenges in resolving paternity claims when jurisdictional hurdles, lack of evidence, and repeated dismissals intervene before reaching merits like DNA testing.
The case has sparked broader discussions on celebrity privacy, access to justice for ordinary individuals, and the emotional toll of unresolved identity questions. While Satterthwaite has framed his pursuit as a quest for truth, the courts have consistently found insufficient grounds to proceed.
As the dust settles, the ruling provides Jay-Z with both closure and financial reimbursement, signaling that this chapter of legal contention is conclusively over. No further developments are anticipated unless extraordinary circumstances prompt appellate review, though the "with prejudice" status severely limits such options.
