PAY NAY: Chris Brown (top left) and rival Drake (bottom left) are off the hook for a June 2012 club fight (right) between their entourages at W.i.P. (
)
Chris Brown and Drake don’t owe a cent to a nightclub owner for the infamous bottle-throwing brawl between their entourages over sultry songbird Rihanna, a Manhattan judge has ruled.
Jon Bakhshi, the former owner of Soho hot spots Greenhouse and W.i.P., had tried to collect $16 million by suing the performers, calling their June 2012 fight a “violent, life-threatening riot” that he claimed sank a $4 million deal he had to license the Greenhouse name outside of New York City.
Except the fracas didn’t happen at Greenhouse, to which Bakhshi owns the trademark, but rather at its adjacent sister club, which is housed in the same building.
“Whatever happened in the other nightclub, didn’t happen in your nightclub,” no-nonsense Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Anil Singh told the attorney for Bakhshi’s Entertainment Enterprises.
“There was no damage to your property that you allege. There was no injury to patrons in your club,” he ruled last month in tossing out Bakhshi’s $16 million suit.
Bakhshi also founded the Juliet Supper Club, which was closed down after a fatal stabbing followed by a shooting in 2011.
His attorney, Andrew Miltenberg, tried to argue that Drake and Brown brought “armies” of personal security guards “to fight this war” over Rihanna, which damaged the Greenhouse name. But Singh scoffed at the hyperbole.
“Unfortunately, brawls in bars and nightclubs are commonplace,” Judge Singh said in the Manhattan Supreme Court decision. “In fact, [brawls] have occurred in the past in Greenhouse.”
Drake’s attorney, Harry Steinberg, applauded the ruling.
“We’re very happy the judge saw the case for what it’s worth,” he said. “Zero.”
The judge denied Steinberg’s request to impose penalties on Bakhshi for bringing an “utterly frivolous” lawsuit that cost Drake almost six figures in legal bills.
“It’s unfortunate that people in the position of my client can be litigation magnets,” Steinberg said.
Miltenberg said he was “fundamentally unhappy with the judge’s decision” and noted that he’s mulling an appeal.