Diddy’s Ex-Nanny Accuses Mogul of Refusing to Turn Over Evidence in Court Battle, Kim Porter’s Alleged Niece Demands Sanctions
Oct. 11 2023, Published 10:45 a.m. ET
Diddy’s ex-nanny has rushed to court demanding the mogul be sanctioned for allegedly dragging his feet on producing documents in her wrongful termination lawsuit.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, Raven Walden, who worked for Diddy and his family from 2018 to 2020, accused the music executive of failing to turn over a single document in more than 8 months despite her demands.
Raven sued Diddy claiming she was fired after informing him she was pregnant. In her lawsuit, she said she was hired to help Diddy take care of his twins, Jessie James and D’Lila, following the death of their mother Kim Porter.
Raven said she was Kim’s niece. In her lawsuit, she said she moved into Diddy’s LA compound and became extremely close with his entire family.
However, in August 2020, she said things took a dark turn when she asked for maternity leave. Raven said she was terminated.
After asking for a reason, Raven said she was told it was because she was pregnant but not married which was a bad example for Diddy’s daughters.
Her lawsuit seeks unspecified damages.
Diddy previously called the lawsuit a “meritless shakedown.” The mogul admitted Raven worked for him but said her case was meant to “extort him.”
His team claimed Raven was hired as a temporary employee and was never meant to be a long-term job.
- Diddy Accuses Kim Porter's Alleged Niece of Failing to Do Her Job Property as His Nanny After She Sues for Wrongful Termination
- Diddy's Ex-Nanny Finally Reveals Her Identity In Court After Claiming To Be Mogul's Late Ex Kim Porter's Niece
- Diddy’s Ex-Nanny Suing Mogul Pleads To Keep Her Identity Hidden, Fears Harassment After ‘Extortion’ Claims
His rep said, “Her babysitting services were always intended to be temporary especially since the girls were getting older and spending most of the day at school.”
Diddy also denied the claim Raven was actually Kim’s niece.
In his response to the lawsuit, Diddy argued Raven failed to do her job property. He argued her claims or wrongful termination should be dismissed due to her failure to “satisfactorily perform her job responsibilities, and otherwise conduct herself in accordance with the standards and policies of Combs Defendants.”
Diddy argued his decisions regarding Raven’s employment were made in good faith and not discriminatory.
Now, Raven has asked the judge presiding over the case for help getting Diddy to produce documents she believes are crucial to the case.
Her lawyers have demanded Diddy and his team turn over documents concerning Raven’s employee and termination. Her lawyer said, “Defendants have been completely evasive in their discovery responses.”
Raven said Diddy and his lawyers have “abused the discovery process with impunity and have shown no regard for this Court’s directions to them, their own promises, or their discovery obligations.”
The ex-nanny said Diddy “must be compelled to fulfill his own verified statements of compliance. The Court should impose monetary sanctions on Defendant and his counsel to obtain their compliance and compensate Plaintiff for $5,309.20 in reasonable fees and costs incurred in seeking judicial intervention in the face of such blatant obstructionism.”
The judge has yet to rule.