Interscope Sues Summer Walker, Seeking at Least $50 Million in Damages

Views 5 Published by October 10, 2026

Interscope Records sued Summer Walker in Los Angeles County Superior Court, seeking at least $50 million after the R&B singer said she was ending her 2017 recording contract under California's seven-year rule. The suit was filed on Friday, according to Rolling Stone.

Interscope Records, which is owned by UMG, has filed a lawsuit against Grammy-nominated R&B singer Summer Walker seeking damages of at least $50 million. The complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court and obtained by Rolling Stone, alleges that Walker still owes the label two studio albums and an EP under a deal she first signed in 2017.

Walker recently invoked the California labor law known as the “seven-year rule,” which generally limits personal-services contracts, including recording agreements, to seven years. In a letter to the label cited in the complaint, she said that effective Aug. 27, 2026, she would no longer render service under the agreement because it is no longer enforceable.

The lawsuit states that the “undelivered recordings remain due and outstanding” and that UMG “is entitled to recover damages in excess of $50,000,000 for the undelivered recordings.” According to the complaint, the original agreement and later amendments required five studio albums. Walker’s earlier projects, Last Day of Summer and CLEAR, were classified as “pre-album projects” that did not count toward that total.

Rolling Stone reported that industry experts who reviewed a draft of the agreement described its terms as “brutal.” According to the outlet, the final contract set an initial advance of $110,000 and a 16 percent royalty rate for the first two albums, payable only after recoupment of the advance and other charged costs.

Attempts to reach a spokesperson for Walker were not immediately successful, Rolling Stone reported. An Interscope spokesperson said in a statement that the label remains hopeful that ongoing discussions will lead to an amicable resolution, but that “the statutory deadline makes it necessary to file suit in order to preserve the terms of our contract.”