Lady Gaga won’t have to pay $500,000 reward for dog’s return: judge

Lady Gaga will not pay the promised $500,000 reward for the return of her French bulldogs, which were stolen back in 2021.

A Los Angeles County judge ruled Monday that Gaga doesn’t have to pay 53-year-old Jennifer McBride for the return of her dogs because the woman had “dirty hands” in connection with the dog’s original abduction.

McBride filed a lawsuit against Gaga earlier this year after the singer failed to pay the woman accused of her involvement in the 2021 accident. In the multimillion-dollar lawsuit, McBride accused Gaga of breach of contract, fraud by false promises and fraud by misrepresentation when she failed to pay “no questions asked” after the dogs were safely returned.

McBride sued not only for the $500,000 award, but also for an additional $1.5 million in further damages. However, according to Judge Holly J. Fujii, McBride is “not entitled” to a penny.

Lady Gaga’s dog was stolen and the dog owner was brutally attacked

News of the dog abduction first made headlines in February 2021 when Gaga’s dog walker Ryan Fischer was brutally attacked while walking Gaga’s three dogs.

While walking, two men jumped out of the car and tried to grab the pets, which led to a fight with Fischer. The fight escalated until one of the men pulled out a semi-automatic pistol and shot the dog walker in the chest, causing life-threatening injuries that led to multiple hospitalizations and ultimately the partial removal of a lung.

Two dogs named Koji and Gustav were stolen, but the third dog, Asia, was left behind. Gaga, who was touring Europe at the time, quickly took to Instagram to ask for the public’s help and offer a $500,000 reward for the return of her beloved pets.

The bulldogs were found just two days later when a woman whom police initially believed to be “uninvolved and uninvolved” returned them to the LAPD’s Olympic Community Police Station.

However, it was later revealed that the woman was McBride, who was in a relationship with Harold White, the father of one of the attack suspects. Both were charged with being an accessory to attempted murder along with suspects James Jackson, 18, Jaylin White, 19, and Lafayette Whaley, 27, who were charged with attempted murder, conspiracy to commit robbery and second-degree robbery.

Jackson was later sentenced to 21 years for pulling the trigger, White received four years and Whaley received six.

McBride was originally charged with one count of accessory and receiving stolen property, but the accessory charge was dropped as part of a plea deal. McBride pleaded guilty to receiving stolen property over $950 and was sentenced to two years probation.

Dog snatching suspect sues Lady Gaga

McBride never received the $500,000 reward she believed she was entitled to, despite her involvement in the crime.

In a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles court last year, she alleged that the singer tricked her into giving up her pets by promising a “no questions asked” $500,000 reward.

Court documents obtained by USA TODAY at the time support McBride’s charges against the pop star, including breach of contract, fraud by false promises and fraud by misrepresentation. In addition to seeking a $500,000 award, she sought legal fees and compensation for financial “damages,” “pain and suffering,” “mental anguish” and “loss of enjoyment of life.”

In the lawsuit, McBride argued that she had “fully performed her obligations under the unilateral contract” and accused Gaga of advertising the reward “with the intent to deceive and induce members of the public to rely on it and act in accordance with the stated terms.” promised.”

The court initially dismissed McBride’s appeal in July, but allowed her to return following a review. This time, Judge Fuji not only ruled in Gaga’s favor, but also ruled that McBride could not re-file the lawsuit.

In her previous ruling, the judge said McBride was trying to “benefit from her admitted offence.” In that decision, she ruled that Gaga was not obligated to honor her earlier promise to provide consideration, stating that “a party to a contract who acts wrongfully in entering into or performing a contract is not entitled to further benefit from his wrongdoing in seeking to enforce the contract.”

Although McBridge argued that she was not involved in the theft and did not know about its planning before it happened, the judge noted in her final decision that “it is notable that she never claims that she did not know that the bulldogs were stolen after them.” they were stolen or at the time she received them.”