The legal battle between Frank Ocean and his Father Calvin Cooksey has just hit a minor speed bump. According to The Jasmine Brand, a judge criticized the 29-year-old singer for offering up a defense mostly devoid of any facts.
As previously reported, Cooksey is suing his son for defamation and $14.5 million (£11.25 million) in damages in response to a note that Ocean posted last summer on his Tumblr in the aftermath of the Orlando nightclub shooting. In the statementOcean said: “I was six years old when I heard my dad call our transgender waitress a faggot as he dragged me out a neighbourhood diner saying we wouldn’t be served because she was dirty. That was the last afternoon I saw my father and the first time I heard that word, I think, although it wouldn’t shock me if it wasn’t.”
Cooksey denied the accusation of homophobia in his complaint. He said that it has “ruined” his “future financial opportunities in the film and music industries.” He also accused Ocean of publishing “falsehoods” for “the financial success” of his recent album ‘Blonde’, further describing him as “a fraud [who] only cared about making millions of dollars”.
Here’s the latest: Then on July 7th, a hearing was held in the case on Frank Ocean’s father Calvin Cooksey’s motion in which he attempted to argue his son did not file his response properly and attempting to have it thrown out.
Cooksey accused Ocean of answering the complaint without any facts supporting his position to dismiss the $14.5 mill lawsuit.
The judge notes that Ocean’s defenses to the lawsuit are one sentence and completely devoid of any factual support. However, he denied Cooksey’s motion to strike the singers answers to the suit.
He did note that Ocean is on notice that several of his defenses indeed seem to have been put forward without any sort of factual basis. As the case proceeds, he notes if it becomes clear Ocean is persisting with the same arguments in order to confuse his father or hide the truth of the matter, the court would consider sanctioning the singer for such conduct.
The order notes that the judge is aware both sides have engaged in litigation tactics that are unnecessary to the case and he discourages them from continuing their behavior. He says this is a straight forward case and does not warrant intensive tactics that have nothing to do with the issues of the case.