Disclaimer: We are not attorneys. This site does not provide legal advice.
October 26, 2025

November 15, 2021 – Brittany Courville Misrepresents Lawsuit in Instagram Live

0

Date: November 15, 2021

Instagram Live Post – Misstatements About Legal Case

On November 15, 2021, Brittany Courville went live on Instagram to discuss the 2019 lawsuit that Lou Taylor filed against me. During the livestream, she read from the complaint and publicly misstated key facts, including the law firm that filed the suit and the reasons behind it. Her tone was mocking, and she used the opportunity to cast doubt on the validity of the case while undermining my character.

Video Backup: Embedded below is a copy of the original Instagram Live, uploaded here for public documentation, archival preservation, and potential use in legal proceedings, should formal action become necessary.

Instagram Live Link: Watch on Instagram

Caption:
“Lou suing alleged fans”

Transcript Excerpt:
“Lou Taylor filed a lawsuit against this alleged fan Bryan Kuchar in 2019… She sued this fan for making a website… She’s using this lawsuit to be like, ‘look how important and special I am.’ But Matt Rosengart said she was using Britney’s money to pay for those awards.” …
“For a while, I wasn’t going into this out of respect for Bryan, but based on his actions, I don’t think his behavior has been very respectful, so there’s no reason for me to pay respect.”

Click to view full transcript of Brittany’s Instagram Live (November 15, 2021)

Everybody, I just wanted to come live for just a few seconds. I’m actually looking at the lawsuit that Lou Taylor filed against this alleged fan Bryan Kuchar in 2019. And I want to go through this whole entire lawsuit and stuff with y’all.

But first thing I wanted to do, I’m just kind of like taking a glance through right now for the first parts of it. And she mentions or her lawyer mentions here, let’s see, in the parties, something that I found really interesting. So this would have been the same law firm that tried to have my YouTube channel removed — Marcy L. Sperry at Vivid IP.

And Marcy L. Sperry says here, Lou Taylor is the CEO and founder of TriStar Sports and Entertainment Group, which is in the business of providing business management services to participants in the sports and entertainment industries. Over the course of nearly three decades, she launched TriStar in 1992. Taylor and her team have served numerous world-renowned performers, blah, blah, blah.

Then down here, this is the interesting part. Taylor’s success in the field of sports and entertainment business management garnered her numerous accolades and considerable media attention, including landing her on the Hollywood Reporter’s top business manager list consecutively from 2014 to 2018 and Variety Magazine’s business managers elite. So she’s using this in a lawsuit to be like, oh, look how important and special Lou Taylor is.

She’s got all these awards, but Matt Rosengart just now told us in a filing the other day that Lou Taylor has been using Britney Spears’ money to pay for these awards. She’s not even really winning them. She’s paying for them. According to Matt Rosengart — at least that was my understanding of the reading — correct me if I’m wrong.

So look at her suing this fan for making a website out of her and the district court of the Northern District of Georgia in Atlanta and being all, look how famous and special I am. Look at me being famous and special. Come to find out she used Britney Spears’ money to get these awards. Huh? Huh?

What’s Nelson saying? Wait, what’s going on? Not me watching this from the literal sky. Oh my God. I love you, Nelson. Okay. Anyway, I’m going to go over this whole entire lawsuit.

I just downloaded all the files. They’re publicly available. This is not private information.

And for a while, I was not going into this out of respect for Bryan, but as his actions have demonstrated over the last few weeks, I’m not going to get into any details because I don’t have to. Um, I don’t think his behavior has been very respectful, so there’s no reason for me to pay respect. So this is publicly available information, publicly available documents.

And you know what? It does show exactly what Lou Taylor does. So we are going to be getting into this. So I look forward to going over that on the YouTube channel and all that.

It’s just easier for me to go on YouTube because I don’t have to deal with things like this where it’s not focusing. But anyway, yeah, I did pay for these documents. Yes, I sure did.

Bought them with my own money. So yeah, I’ll do all kinds of other things. But yeah, I just wanted to let y’all know that Lou Taylor had her lawyer use this crap in a law filing when in fact these are just awards that you can just buy.

You just get your name put on those lists with money. And then come to find out, it looks like Lou was using Britney’s money on at least some of those years. So anyway, all right, I gotta go.

I gotta run. But I wanted to just show y’all that. Talk to you later.

Facts Ain’t Defamation. K, love you. Bye.


Referenced Court Document:

Clarification: In the video, Brittany misattributes the filing of the lawsuit to Vivid IP. However, the original complaint was filed by Jordan A. Fishman of Stokes Wagner. Vivid IP did not appear on the docket until December 9, 2019 — months later. Her misstatement creates a misleading timeline and appears aimed at reinforcing a narrative tied to her broader social media claims.

Relevant Legal Considerations:

Restatement (Second) of Torts § 652E – False Light
Misrepresenting a lawsuit’s origins and falsely implying misconduct can give rise to a false light privacy claim if the portrayal is offensive and misleading to a reasonable person.

N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4.1 – Cyber-Harassment
A pattern of mischaracterization and online ridicule may constitute harassment under New Jersey law, particularly when targeting individuals by name using knowingly false claims.


Screenshots:


All audio, documents, images, quotes, screenshots, and videos are presented for documentation and public interest under fair use. This post also serves as part of an ongoing evidentiary record and may be referenced in future legal proceedings if warranted.

Leave a Reply