Recommended Free Tools
A September 2024 report said Michigan prisoner Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith had obtained a $100 million default judgment against Sean Combs. That figure describes a reported state-court judgment—not a verified payment, and the available later federal orders do not establish whether the judgment was ultimately vacated, reversed, satisfied, or remains enforceable. The underlying sexual-assault account was Cardello-Smith’s allegation, not a fact established at trial.
What the $100 million figure refers to
On September 10, 2024, Law&Crime reported that Cardello-Smith had secured a $100 million default judgment against Combs in a Michigan lawsuit. The report attributed an account of sexual assault to Cardello-Smith. A default judgment is a court judgment entered when a party does not respond or otherwise defend as required; it is not, by itself, a trial finding that every allegation is true. The federal orders discussed below address procedure, not whether the alleged events occurred. Law&Crime’s September 10, 2024 report
The reported amount should not be described as money Combs paid or as a debt currently being collected. The reviewed record does not establish either outcome.
What happened in court
- June 10, 2024: A later federal order recounts that Cardello-Smith filed the action against Combs in Lenawee County Circuit Court on or about this date. Eastern District of Michigan, ECF No. 35
- September 10, 2024: Law&Crime reported the $100 million default judgment. This is the date and source associated with the widely circulated figure. Law&Crime report
- October 7, 2024: Combs removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. In a November 15 order, the federal court found service had not been properly made and denied Cardello-Smith’s requests to remand the case to state court. ECF No. 35
- January 22, 2025: A later federal order states that a case against Combs was dismissed with prejudice on this date. The later order concerns a federal case; it should not be treated as proof that the original state-court default judgment was vacated or reversed. Eastern District of Michigan, ECF No. 141
- April 28, 2025: Judge Judith E. Levy issued a final warning against further duplicative, frivolous, fraudulent, or harassing filings in the proceeding addressed by that order. ECF No. 141
- June 30 and September 19, 2025: A subsequent order recounts that Cardello-Smith was enjoined from filing new lawsuits or other documents in the Eastern District of Michigan without first obtaining leave. On September 19, the court denied his motion for leave to apply to waive appeal filing fees, citing the three-strikes rule. Eastern District of Michigan, ECF No. 182
Why the service ruling does not answer whether the allegations were true
Service is the formal delivery of lawsuit papers to a defendant. The federal court’s finding that Combs had not been properly served, and its denial of remand, were procedural rulings about the case’s handling. They did not decide whether Cardello-Smith’s assault allegation was true, nor do they independently determine the present enforceability of the reported state-court judgment. A ruling about appeal-fee assistance is likewise distinct from a ruling on the merits.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Rank #2
#1 Best Overall
What is known—and what remains unresolved
- Known: A September 2024 Law&Crime report associated a $100 million default judgment with Cardello-Smith’s lawsuit against Combs. The allegation underlying the suit is attributed to Cardello-Smith, not established as a trial finding in the reviewed orders. Law&Crime report
- Known: The action was filed in Lenawee County Circuit Court on or about June 10, 2024, and removed to federal court on October 7. The federal court later found service improper and denied remand. ECF No. 35
- Not established by the reviewed later orders: Whether the original state-court default judgment was ultimately vacated, reversed, satisfied, or remains enforceable. The orders concerning federal dismissal, filing restrictions, and appeal fees do not settle that question. ECF No. 35 ECF No. 141 ECF No. 182
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
