‘Shark Tank’ Daymond John Attacked, Gets Retraining Order
A legal case between Daymond John and former Shark Tank contestants has reached a final decision. The judge in the case has finally granted John a permanent restraining order against the contestants that he invested in after they appeared on Shark Tank.
Here is a look at what happened and why John received his restraining order.
Daymond John gains restraining order against Shark Tank contestants
Daymond John sought and received a permanent restraining order against three former Shark Tank contestants that he said had repeatedly verbally attacked him on social media. He called the experience a nightmare according to court documents acquired by PEOPLE. The three people he received the court order against include Al “Bubba” Baker, his wife Sabrina, and his daughter Brittani.
The court order said that the three are no longer allowed to speak out about their interaction with John following his investment in their company, Bubba’s Q Boneless Baby Back Ribs, in 2014. The three are also ordered to delete all “disparaging” comments about John from their social media accounts. They accused him on social media of trying to take over their business. They also have to delete all posts about Rastelli Foods Group, the company retained to partner with John and the Bakers.
“All the Bakers’ posts are negative, disparaging, or both, and certainly could impact DFV’s and John’s reputation, goodwill, and credibility,” U.S. District Judge Robert Kugler wrote in his order. This followed a temporary restraining order released earlier in the year as the judge examined the case.
What led to Daymond John’s court case
The court ruling was not an infringement on the first amendment rights of Al “Bubba” Baker, his wife Sabrina, and his daughter Brittani. The problems came thanks to a settlement between Daymond John and the family in 2019. In that agreement, the family agreed not to disparage John and Rastelli. When the family began to reveal what John allegedly did to them again on social media, they broke the agreement they signed.
Because the family breached this agreement and began to disparage John again, the Shark Tank investor said he lost a new TV opportunity. John testified that there was a major television network that canceled a show he was involved with. He also lost a speaking engagement thanks to the disparaging posts.
John told the Los Angeles Times that this judge’s decision proved that he never committed any wrongdoing. He also said he was always transparent and honest about the situation. John claims that the Bakers made a legal business partnership with him. They chose to go against the legal parameters of that agreement.
The Bakers said that they only received four percent of the total earnings, even though they were the majority owners. They also said that John made financial decisions for their company without their knowledge. John simply referred to these to be “poor business decisions” on their part.
What are your thoughts on the Daymond John situation? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
