TEEN MOM 2 Kail and Briana lawsuit recap and timeline

Kail Lowry's lawsuit against Briana DeJesus needs to be its own Teen Mom 2 spin-off show!

The defamation lawsuit filed by Kailyn Lowry against Briana DeJesus is gaining a lot of attention, and may actually have more drama (and people tuning in) than Teen Mom 2 at this point. Unfortunately, many of our readers haven’t been watching the whole “season.” So, I’ve put together a bullet point recap and timeline of all the #KailVBriana lawsuit developments so far!

I’ve included links to our previous posts if you’d like to know more. Several of the posts include the full filings.

Kailyn Lowry and Briana DeJesus Lawsuit Timeline Recap

June 8, 2021 – An episode of Teen Mom 2 airs that does not include Kail.

June 8-9, 2021 – Briana makes a series of posts and comments on Instagram claiming to know why Kail was absent from the episode. From the initial lawsuit filing by Kail’s attorney:

On the Instagram Live broadcast, Defendant [Briana] claimed that she “know[s] the real story, [she] know[s] what happened,” concerning why Lowry was not included in the June 8, 2021, episode of the Series. Defendant asserted that Lowry was omitted from the episode because she “didn’t want to film about the issues that goes [sic] on with her and Chris” and “tryna [sic] clean up the bad girl act.” Defendant then added that “[Lowry] did not want to film about the situation with the domestic violence, about her getting arrested, about her breaking and entering into…Chris’s mom’s house. She didn’t want to film about her hitting Chris because Chris cut her son’s hair.” Defendant then claimed she “was just stating facts. So that’s what happened.

June 25, 2021 – Kail and her attorneys file a defamation lawsuit against Briana due to what she said about Kail [aka “the Post”]. “Lowry did not break into and enter the home of Mr. Lopez’s mother. Nor did Ms. Lowry beat Mr. Lopez,” the filing argues. “As a result of the Post, Lowry has suffered damages consisting in the impairment of her reputation and standing in the community, personal humiliation, and mental anguish and suffering in an amount to be determined at trial.”

July 23, 2021 – Briana officially retains high profile 1st Amendment attorney Marc Randazza.

August 9, 2021 – Marc Randazza files a 40-page Motion for Summary Judgment, which is essentially asking the judge to throw the case out due to lack of merit. The filing reveals that Briana’s source of information was was Kail’s ex, Chris Lopez. From the filing (with first names substituted):

Kail’s Complaint is a classic SLAPP suit. It is meritless and directed exclusively at protected speech on a matter of public concern brought for the purpose of harassing and trying to silence a critic, rather than to vindicate any of Kail’s rights.

Kail has filed suit based on Briana discussing the fact that Kail was arrested for allegedly physically assaulting the father of two of her children. She verifiably was arrested for this, and her arrest garnered media attention. Kail cannot show falsity, she cannot show actual malice, and she cannot even show that she complied with the pre-suit notice requirements of Fla. Stat. § 770.01. The Court should dismiss Kail’s Complaint with prejudice and award Briana her costs and attorneys’ fees under Fla. Stat. § 768.295(4).

August 30, 2021 – Kail’s legal team, which includes New York attorney Nicole Haff of Romano Law, file a 95-page response to Kail’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

The filing disputes Kail’s claim that Chris is her source of information for multiple reasons. One of the reasons is that Briana described her source as part of “production,” and Chris has not previously been involved with the show at all. (Saying you have a production source is a very common way to describe anonymous sources in regards to television shows. Media outlets like Starcasm and others often use that terminology to describe pretty much any confidential source whether or not they actually appeared on the show. We are usually a little more broad and say something like “a source close to production.”)

The filing also includes texts messages between Chris and Kail that seem to dispute the fact that Chris talked to Briana. The filing turns around and argues that the contentious relationship between Chris and Kail would suggest that he isn’t a credible source for factual information regarding their interactions, despite just using Chris’s texts as a source. From the filing:

Even if Chris provided her with this information, which his own texts state that he did not, any reliance Soto could place on Chris as a source would be inherently unreasonable. Soto has never even met Chris. She has previously accused Chris of beating Lowry in front of Lowry’s children — an accusation that was neither provoked by anything Lowry or Chris said or did, but instead was a reaction Soto had after a fan of the Series was critical of Soto for verbally attacking Lowry in front of Lowry’s children.

October 19, 2021 – A hearing is set for January 14 in regards to Briana’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

November 2, 2021 – Chris Lopez submits an affidavit in which he admits that he was the one who told Briana about Kail hitting him, etc. “I met with Briana Soto in Miami on or around April 11, 2021,” Chris says. “We spent a few days there together.”

November 24, 2021 – Briana’s attorney files Chris’s affidavit.

Here’s an excerpt from Chris’s affidavit:

On the first day we spent together, we spoke about the incident that happened between Kailyn Lowry and myself in September 2020 which resulted in Lowry’s arrest.

I told Briana that Kailyn punched me multiple times during this incident.

I told Briana that Kailyn punched me because Kailyn was mad that I cut our son Lux’s hair.

I told Briana that Kailyn learned of Lux’s haircut when she visited my mother’s home on September 4, 2020 to pick up Lux.

I told Briana that my mother and my sister were both present during this incident and witnessed Kailyn’s conduct.

I told Briana that upon learning of Lux’s haircut, Kailyn became very upset, stormed into my mother’s home, and began to punch me.

Chris’s affidavit deals a HUGE blow to Kail’s lawsuit. It is reasonable that Briana would believe what Chris told her, especially given the public information that Kail was arrested. Plus, Kail’s attorney previously argued that Briana “has never even met” Chris, which is apparently incorrect. Like, “three days in Miami together” incorrect!

December 15, 2021 – Briana’s attorney files a motion to move the scheduled hearing date from January 14 to January 19 “or such other time as the Court may be available.” Mr. Randazza says that he will not be able to participate in the January 14 hearing “due to the fact that he will be out of the country, in a remote area, and will be unlikely to be able to access a reliable internet connection.”

The filing was made after a failed attempt by Briana’s attorney to work out a new date with Kail’s attorney.

Kail’s attorney (Nicole Haff) did not agree to a continuance for two reasons. Number one, she believes that Mr. Randazza (Briana’s attorney) waited to file Chris’s affidavit until the day before Thanksgiving. She states in an email to Mr. Randazza that the delay in filing the affidavit was “presumably in an attempt to upset my client before the holiday.”

The second reason for Nicole Haff denying the continuance is because Briana sent Kail a treadmill as a gift. (Seriously.) From the email:

In the past week, Ms. [Briana] Soto informed my client, via social media, that she was sending her a surprise. The surprise was a treadmill. When read with the message, a reasonable reader would view it as your client calling my client overweight. We know your client sent it because her name was the shipping receipt.

An excerpt from Mr. Randazza’s response:

As the Court can see in the emails filed herewith (Exhibit 1), Plaintiffs counsel claims that the Defendant sent the Plaintiff a treadmill. Plaintiffs counsel then claims that Plaintiff interpreted this as Defendant calling Plaintiff “overweight.”

Seriously? This degree of pettiness and schoolyard conduct should find its way into a CLE (Continuing Legal Education) about how and why the modem practice of law is so uncivil.

This should have been embarrassing to commit to writing. The reason that Plaintiffs counsel will not agree to a reasonable continuance is because one party believes that a gift from the other was part of a spat over their respective waistlines?

Again, this is not prejudice as a reason for refusing to grant a continuance. This is, again, spite. If this court wishes to have civility, it should not stamp its imprimatur on junior-high level spats and spite.

Spitefulness is not a reason to deny a reasonable request for a professional courtesy. There should have been no reason to even file this motion.. Nevertheless, here we are.

Asa Hawks is a writer and editor for Starcasm. You can contact Asa via Twitter, Facebook, or email at starcasmtips(at)yahoo.com

web analytics