What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
The widely reported figure was $100 million, not more than $100 million. CBS Detroit reported in September 2024 that a Michigan judge entered that amount as a default judgment in a civil case brought by Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith, who alleged Combs sexually assaulted him in 1997. The report does not establish that the allegation was proved at a contested trial, and the later court record does not establish whether the judgment was ultimately collected or set aside.
What was the $100 million judgment?
CBS Detroit reported on September 10, 2024, that a Michigan judge had ordered Sean “Diddy” Combs to pay Cardello-Smith $100 million by default. Cardello-Smith’s case alleged a sexual assault in 1997. Combs’s lawyer said he would seek to have the judgment dismissed. The original state-court judgment was not available among the records reviewed, so the reported amount and circumstances should be attributed to CBS Detroit rather than presented as independently verified from that judgment. CBS Detroit’s report
A default judgment is not the same thing as a damages award reached after both sides litigate the evidence at trial. The reporting describes a judgment entered after Combs failed to appear; it does not establish a contested trial finding that the alleged assault occurred.
What happened in the courts afterward?
The case moved from state to federal court
Cardello-Smith filed the action in Lenawee County around June 10, 2024. Combs removed it to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on October 7, 2024. In a November 15, 2024 opinion, the federal court denied remand, concluding that Cardello-Smith had not properly served Combs under the relevant Michigan rule. Federal court opinion dated November 15, 2024
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
#1 Best Overall
The federal case was later dismissed
A later federal opinion recounts that the case was dismissed with prejudice on January 22, 2025. That opinion addresses later filings and warnings; it does not determine the precise collection status of the earlier state-court default judgment. Federal court opinion dated April 28, 2025
The state appeal did not resolve the allegation on its merits
On February 28, 2025, the Michigan Court of Appeals denied Cardello-Smith’s application for leave to appeal, stating: “The application for leave to appeal is DENIED.” The short order is not a merits decision on whether the alleged assault occurred. Michigan Court of Appeals order
Rank #2
A later filing restriction is separate procedural context
A September 19, 2025 federal order says Cardello-Smith had been enjoined from filing new lawsuits or other documents in the Eastern District of Michigan without first obtaining leave. That restriction does not, by itself, establish whether the original default judgment remained enforceable. Federal court order dated September 19, 2025
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Did Combs have to pay the $100 million?
The available records do not establish that Combs paid the reported amount, that the judgment was collected, or that a state court later set it aside. The federal removal, subsequent federal dismissal, and state appellate denial are distinct procedural events; none of the cited materials supplies a complete current state-court docket or resolves the original judgment’s enforcement status. It is therefore not possible from these records to say that the judgment was definitively paid, collected, or vacated.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Quick Recap
Best Value
What the headline gets wrong
- Amount: The contemporaneous report says $100 million, not “over $100 million.”
- Who brought the case: The plaintiff was Derrick Lee Cardello-Smith.
- What the award proves: The report describes a default judgment in a case alleging a 1997 assault; it is not evidence of a contested trial finding on the allegation.
- Present status: The cited later proceedings do not establish whether the state judgment was paid, collected, or set aside.
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.
