Usher Sues Music Producer Over Failed Atlanta Restaurant, Says His $700K Loan Was Never Repaid
In a significant legal development, R&B superstar Usher has filed a lawsuit against music producer Bryan-Michael Cox and several associates involved in a failed restaurant venture in Atlanta, seeking $700,000 in restitution. The lawsuit, initiated in a Georgia court, centers around Usher’s claim that he loaned over $1.7 million to Cox and his team to facilitate the purchase of a property intended for “Homage ATL,” a high-end dining establishment located in the affluent Buckhead neighborhood. According to Usher’s attorneys, despite the substantial financial backing, the project fell through, and Usher was only reimbursed $1 million, leaving a balance of $700,000 that he alleges was misappropriated by the defendants for purposes outside the original agreement.
The legal dispute has its roots in negotiations that began last year when Cox and his partners approached Usher, hoping to leverage his star power to attract patrons to the new restaurant. Although Usher was initially courted to become a full-fledged partner, he opted instead to provide a loan for the property acquisition, which was purportedly valued at over $6 million. As time passed without the completion of the purchase, Usher’s attorneys claim that Cox and his associates diverted the loan funds for unauthorized uses. The lawsuit alleges that attorney Alcide Honoré, who was involved in the project, acknowledged that returning the remaining loan balance was complicated because the funds had been allocated elsewhere, indicating a lack of control over the money that Usher had provided.
In a public statement on Instagram, Cox attempted to distance himself from the situation, asserting that he is merely a passive minority shareholder in the venture and emphasizing that his long-standing friendship with Usher remains intact despite the legal turmoil. However, Usher’s legal team contends that the defendants unjustly enriched themselves at Usher’s expense, leading to claims of breach of contract, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. The case not only highlights the complexities of business partnerships in the entertainment industry but also raises questions about financial accountability when high-profile figures lend their support to ambitious projects. As the lawsuit unfolds, it will be interesting to see how both parties navigate this dispute and what implications it may have for future collaborations in the world of music and business.
Usher
is suing music producer
Bryan-Michael Cox
and other organizers of a failed Atlanta restaurant project, claiming in a new lawsuit that they still owe him $700,000 and misused money he lent to buy the property.
In a case filed last week in Georgia court and obtained by
Billboard
, the Atlanta superstar says he lent more than $1.7 to Cox and others to help purchase a building for “Homage ATL,” a high-end restaurant and lounge in the city’s tony Buckhead neighborhood.
Related
Kim Kardashian Sex Tape, Rolling Stones Lawsuit, Megan Thee Stallion Case & More Music Law News
Cristela Alonzo Announces ‘Midlife Mixtape’ Tour for 2026: Full Details
‘Weird Al’ Yankovic Rolls Out 90 New Dates for 2026 ‘Bigger & Weirder’ Tour: ‘Fans Weren’t Sick of Us Yet, So We’re Just Going to Keep on Touring Until They Are!’
When the deal didn’t go through, Usher’s lawyers say he demanded his money back, but the Homage organizers only returned $1 million – because the rest had allegedly been used elsewhere without permission.
“Plaintiff loaned [the money] for the sole purpose of purchasing the Buckhead property,” Usher’s attorneys write. “The defendant investor group failed to purchase the Buckhead property and, instead, diverted the Raymond loan balance for [other] purposes.”
Cox is a well-known R&B producer who’s produced hits for Mary J. Blige, Mariah Carey and Usher himself. The other defendants are alleged project partners Keith Thomas and Charles Hughes, as well as attorney Alcide Honoré and several companies allegedly tied to the project.
In a statement on Instagram, Cox seemed to pin the blame for the dispute on others: “My legal team has … advised me of a lawsuit involving a company where I am only a passive minority shareholder. I was not a participant in that business transaction and have no involvement in the ongoing legal process. While I’m unable to share more details right now, I want to make one thing absolutely clear: my 27-year friendship with @usher remains fully intact.”
But Usher’s lawyers don’t seem to be in a friendly mood. They claim Cox and the rest of the Homage organizers were “unjustly enriched” by using the remaining loan funds for other reasons, “which was to plaintiff’s detriment, damage, and expense.”
Related
Eminem Takes Legal Action Against ‘Swim Shady’ Beach Umbrella Brand: ‘Confusingly Similar’
Usher’s case claims that Cox, Hughes and Thomas approached him last year about the project, which was “intended to offer the public a unique dining lounge experience.” Though he says they wanted the locally-raised superstar to sign onto the project as a full-fledged partner, Usher says he “declined to become an investor” and instead opted merely to loan the group money to buy the restaurant’s location for more than $6 million.
As the “days and months passed” in early 2025, the two sides continued to negotiate a potential investment by Usher, but no deal was ever reached and the Buckhead property was never purchased. Eventually, the star says he demanded his money back – but that Honoré effectively told him that some of the funds had been used elsewhere.
“Honoré all but admitted that the Raymond loan balance was disbursed when he stated that returning that balance was ‘not that easy’ because plaintiff’s funds had been deployed for ‘other purposes’,” Usher’s attorneys write. “Honoré stated [that Usher] would be repaid once the Buckhead property was purchased and the property was refinanced, indicating that he apparently no longer had possession, custody, or control over the funds.”
Several of the lawsuit’s claims are aimed solely at Honoré, including breach of bailment – meaning he failed to return Usher’s property – as well as various other forms of wrongdoing, including negligence and breach of fiduciary duty. He did not return a request for comment. The case accuses the rest of the investors of breach of contract, unjust enrichment and keeping money that wasn’t theirs. Thomas and Hughes could not immediately be reached for comment.
