Drake’s legal team is coming for UMG CEO Lucian Grainge, Kendrick Lamar, and Pusha T as they reportedly request K.Dot’s contract and any domestic violence documents involving him, documents on Pusha T’s diss “The Story Of Adidon,” and more.
On Tuesday (August 12), Drake and his legal filed a new motion “to compel Lucian Grainge’s custodial documents,” along with documents involving rappers Kendrick Lamar and Pusha T. Drake’s lawyers are looking for ammunition in his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s diss “Not Like Us.”
RELATED: Pusha T Reacts To Drake Taking Legal Action Against UMG And Spotify: ‘It’s Crazy’
Drake’s Lawyers Seek Kendrick Lamar’s Contract And Any Domestic Violence Documents Amid UMG Legal Battle
The documents, obtained and shared by MusicBusinessWorldwide, show Drake, born Aubrey Graham, and his lawyers (Michael Gottlieb, Meryl C. Governski, M. Annie Houghton-Larsen, Brady M. Sullivan, Anna Gotfryd, and more) urging the court to have UMG and its CEO Lucian Grainge turn over K.Dot’s contract with them, plus information relating to allegations of domestic violence and other crimes allegedly committed by the Compton rapper.
In one section of the 24-page document, Drake’s attorneys wrote that they wanted:
“From January 1, 2014 to the present, all Documents and Communications relating to allegations of domestic violence, violence against women, and/or other forms of violence committed by Kendrick Lamar Duckworth.
From January 1, 2019 to the present, all Documents and Communications relating to David Isaac Friley (a/k/a Dave Free) and his relationship with Kendrick Lamar Duckworth and kendrick Lamar Duckworth’s children.”
Regarding the request for Kendrick Lamar’s UMG contract, Drake’s lawyers wrote:
“On June 24, 2025, you produced a heavily redacted version of the Interscope Agreement with Kendrick Lamar at UMG_000001873. The extent of your redactions which cover the vast majority of the 22 page agreement—render the agreement unreadable and incomprehensible. The redactions are plainly improper, especially because the parties specifically agreed to treat these types of contracts as Attorneys’ Eyes Only under the terms of the Protective Order. See Durling v. Papa John’s Int’l, Inc., No. 16-CV-03592 (CS) (JCM), 2018 WL 557915, at *9 (S.D.N.Y Jan. 24, 2018).
Your unilateral responsiveness redactions are all the more problematic given that UMG itself has previously refused to permit Plaintiff to make responsiveness redactions, telling Plaintiff that doing so would be “highly unusual and inappropriate” and that “there is no provision in the federal or local rules for redaction of non-responsive portions of otherwise responsive documents[.]” See May 12, 2025 Email from K. Everson.
Plaintiff demands that UMG produce an unredacted version of the document bearing bates number UMG_000001873.”
While reacting to the K.Dot contract request, UMG and their attorneys responded and said:
“UMG agreed to produce the portions of any contracts or agreements between UMG and Lamar allowing UMG to approve, reject, refuse to publish, edit, amend, alter, or veto the publication of the Recording, Image and/or Video. See UMG’s Responses and Objections to Drake’s RFP No.
At your request, we also agreed to produce the section headings in the contract so you could see what topics the redacted portions concern. UMG has done so. Your contention that the contract as produced is somehow incomprehensible is wrong the information we agreed to produce has been produced, and you have not articulated any basis for why Drake requires an unredacted copy of the contract or how the redacted content has any conceivable relevance to the claims and defenses at issue in this case. UMG does not intend to produce an unredacted version of Lamar’s complete contract to Drake.”
RELATED: Judge Denies UMG’s Request To Delay Discovery, Allows Drake To Request Kendrick Lamar’s Record Deal, Executives’ Salaries, And More In “Not Like Us” Defamation Lawsuit
Drake’s Lawyers Seek Documents Relating To Pusha T’s “The Story Of Adidon” Diss Amid UMG Legal Battle
Meanwhile, in another section of the newly-filed motion, Drake’s legal team requests documents related to Pusha T’s 2018 diss track “The Story of Adidon.” Drake’s lawyers said they want to see whether UMG censored any lyrics from that song which may have been defamatory. The document reads:
“For the time period of January 1, 2018 to May 31, 2018, all Documents and Communications relating to any:
instruction, direction, or suggestion that any Musical Work or Music Video by “Pusha T,” including but not limited to “The Story of Adidon,” be censored or otherwise modified/altered based on the content of the Musical Work or Music Video; or
decision to not license, publish, or promote a any Musical Work or Music Video by “Pusha T,” including but not limited to “The Story of Adidon,” on the basis of the content of the Musical Work or Music Video.”
RELATED: Kendrick Lamar Intros “Not Like Us” On Tour By Mocking Drake’s ‘Drop Drop Drop’ Lyric In Fake Deposition Amid UMG Lawsuit
Elsewhere, Drake’s lawyers also accuse Sir Lucian Grainge of being “personally involved” in Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us” marketing and promotion. The document reads:
“There is no doubt that Sir Grainge was made aware of these detailed denials from Drake, as well as Drake’s description of the harm he had suffered as a result of the false allegations. We also have reason to believe that Sir Grainge was personally involved in decisions made regarding the marketing and promotion of the Recording around the release of the Recording. These allegations and assertions are more than sufficient to justify designating Sir Grainge as a document custodian.”
Despite their claims, UMG and their legal team oppose making Lucian Grainge a document custodian.
RELATED: Drake Calls Canadian Politician Jagmeet Singh A ‘Goof’ For Attending Kendrick Lamar Toronto Concert, Jagmeet Later Apologizes To Drizzy
#Socialites, be sure to check out the post below, then leave us your thoughts in a comment after!
