EXCLUSIVE: Judge Judy Begs Court to Allow Her to Revive Lawsuit Against Tabloid She Sued for Defamation Over Menendez Brothers Story
Judge Judy first filed suit in 2024 after claiming the publications falsely portrayed her as attempting to help convicted killers Erik and Lyle Menendez.
June 17 2026, Published 5:30 p.m. ET
Judge Judy is refusing to throw in the towel after suffering a defeat in her defamation lawsuit against the parent company of the National Enquirer and In Touch, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal.
New court documents exclusively obtained by this masthead show Judy Sheindlin has formally appealed the dismissal of her high-profile case against Accelerate360 and A360 Media, escalating the legal battle to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Judge Judy Takes Fight Higher
The legal war stems from articles published by the 'National Enquirer' and 'InTouch Weekly' that falsely claimed the television judge attempted to help Erik and Lyle Menendez secure a new trial.
According to the filing, submitted on May 12, 2026, Sheindlin is seeking review of the federal court's final judgment entered on April 20, as well as the judge's order granting summary judgment in favor of the tabloid publisher.
The appeal asks the higher court to review "all other appealable orders, rulings, judgments, decisions, and findings" connected to the case.
The legal war stems from articles published by the National Enquirer and In Touch that falsely claimed the television judge attempted to help Erik and Lyle Menendez secure a new trial after the judge allegedly "appeared in a documentary" about the infamous brothers.
Sheindlin first filed suit in 2024, alleging the reports falsely attributed statements to her and wrongly suggested she was advocating on behalf of the convicted killers.
Judge Judy Denies Menendez Involvement
According to her lawsuit, the articles incorrectly reported she had appeared in a documentary about the brothers.
According to her lawsuit, the articles incorrectly reported she had appeared in a documentary about the brothers and urged defense attorney Leslie Abramson to seek a new judge in the case.
Sheindlin maintained she never made the statements attributed to her, never appeared in the documentary, and had no involvement in efforts to secure a new trial for the Menendez brothers.
The longtime television star argued the false reports damaged her hard-earned reputation and character, claiming the stories portrayed her as someone willing to intervene in one of the nation's most notorious murder cases.
Court Rejects Judge Judy's Claims
The court concluded that the publications had confused the famous judge with another woman, Judi Zamos, who appeared in a Menendez documentary.
She also alleged the publications failed to correct the record despite being notified of the mistake.
The court concluded that the publications had confused Sheindlin with another woman, Judi Zamos, who appeared in a Menendez documentary.
While the judge criticized the reporting and described the error as a "genuine (though stupid) mistake," the court found Sheindlin failed to meet the demanding legal standard required to prove actual malice.
The ruling emphasized that public figures face a high burden when pursuing defamation claims and concluded that negligence or poor reporting practices alone are not enough to establish liability under the First Amendment.
Reviving Her Claims In New Appeal
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Judy Sheindlin is now asking the appellate court to revisit the case and potentially revive her claims.
Despite that setback, Sheindlin is now asking the appellate court to revisit the case and potentially revive her claims.
The filing was submitted by attorneys John K. Shubin and Eric M. George, who continue to represent Sheindlin in the dispute.
The appeal sets the stage for the next chapter in the closely watched legal showdown and raises the possibility the Eleventh Circuit could revisit whether the lower court correctly applied the actual malice standard in dismissing the case.
Both tabloid titles are now owned by MediaCo, a publisher owned by David Pecker, the confessed mastermind of the catch and kill scheme to protect President Donald Trump.
