S. Samuel
Miami rapper Flo Rida is making some less-than-friendly headlines this week as reports claim an ex-girlfriend turned down an abortion offer to give birth to their alleged child.
According to reports, Flo is being accused of offering to cover abortion costs but insisted he would not pay for any child support.
Natasha Georgette Williams is fighting Flo in court to get financial assistance — he won’t acknowledge he’s the daddy — but in a new court filing she claims he demanded she have an abortion … which she refused. Flo says he wants DNA proof he’s the father, but Williams is refusing in utero testing — amniocentesis — because doctors told her it was invasive and risky for the baby’s health. In the docs, Williams says she’s down for testing — once the baby’s born. (TMZ)
Last year, reports revealed the state of Florida made him pay child support for a two-year-old.
Flo Rida’s baby mama is demanding the rapper fork over some dough for his kid … the very same kid Flo adamantly DENIED fathering — but now we know the truth. The Florida Dept. of Revenue filed legal docs in connection with Gloria Holloway‘s request for child support from Flo — real name Tramar Dillard — for Gloria’s two-year-old son. As TMZ previously reported, Flo denied knocking up Gloria … and even claimed he took a paternity test that came back negative — but according to the new docs, the court has ALREADY established paternity. (TMZ)
Flo recently saved $400,000 after a plaintiff decided to file a lawsuit via mega social network Facebook.
Flo Rida has dodged paying roughly US$400,000 in damages to the organizers of an Australian music festival he failed to show up to. The artist, whose real name is Tramar Dillard, was a no-show at the Fat As Butter fest in 2011, for which he’d apparently been paid his performance fee up-front. Promoters of the show, Mothership Music, sued Dillard and his management, VIP Entertainment and Concepts, in the NSW District Court for breach of contract and damages totalling Australian $417,345 ($377,000). With their options to serve papers limited, at best, the organizers’ legal team took the unusual step of filing a summons via Facebook — on the order of Judge Judith Gibson. (Billboard)
The plaintiff’s determination to serve Flo via Facebook was deemed an unsuitable approach.
After an initial ruling in the festival’s favor, the artist challenged the decision in the NSW Court of Appeal. And on Tuesday, the appeal was upheld. The judges declared that Facebook wasn’t an appropriate channel to serve, because there was no evidence that the artist was indeed connected to the social networking page. “The evidence did not establish, other than by mere assertion, that the Facebook page was in fact that of Flo Rida and did not prove that a posting on it was likely to come to his attention in a timely fashion,” Justice Robert McFarlan said in his reasons for judgment. (Billboard)
