A chaotic night in West Hollywood has landed rapper Kodak Black in the middle of a $10.6 million lawsuit. Two men, Mark Schaefer and Adam Rahman, claim they were shot during a violent altercation outside a Super Bowl after-party in 2022, pointing the finger at Kodak as the spark that ignited the incident. The legal battle is the latest public challenge for the artist, who, as previously reported, also faced an emergency custody motion from his child’s mother.
The incident occurred on February 12, 2022, outside The Nice Guy restaurant in West Hollywood, California. It followed a star-studded after-party tied to a private Justin Bieber concert during Super Bowl weekend. Around 2:45 a.m., a street fight broke out, escalating into gunfire that injured four people: a 60-year-old man, a 20-year-old, a 19-year-old, and Kodak Black himself, then 24, who was shot in the leg.
All victims were hospitalized in stable condition, but the shooter remains unidentified, and no arrests have been made. Original news reports from Sky News detailed the incident and the number of victims. In February 2023, Schaefer and Rahman filed the Kodak Black lawsuit, alleging the rapper, whose legal name is Bill Kapri, was the ‘catalyst’ for the violence.
They claim his actions during the fight led to the shooting, causing them severe injuries. The lawsuit now focuses primarily on Kodak, seeking $10.6 million for negligence, assault, battery, and emotional distress, reminiscent of other public disputes involving the rapper, including our coverage of him calling out his baby mama for using his name. The plaintiffs’ lawyer attempted to secure a default judgment against Kodak, arguing that he had failed to respond to the suit.
The original lawsuit against Justin Bieber and the venue was dismissed, a key detail verified by court filings cited in a Soap Central report. Kodak’s attorney, Bradford Cohen, tells a different story. He insists Kodak was a victim, not the instigator, and was trying to help during the chaos.
Cohen points to video footage showing Kodak rushing toward the fight before ducking for cover as shots rang out. He calls the lawsuit a ‘cash grab’ and disputes its validity, claiming Kodak was never properly served with legal documents. The papers were allegedly sent to an outdated address previously owned by Kodak’s mother, and Cohen argues his client was unaware of the case. This adds another layer to the perception of the artist, who has also been praised for quiet acts of charity in his hometown.
The lawsuit remains unresolved. A judge recently rejected two attempts by the plaintiffs to secure a default judgment. The most recent rejection cited inadequate proof of damages, such as medical bills. The plaintiffs have been given another opportunity to submit an updated request, while Kodak’s legal team prepares to fight the claims in court.
The case has sparked debate over who bears responsibility for the violence and whether Kodak, also a victim of the shooting, should face such a hefty financial penalty.
