Grammy-winning singer Andra Day has secured a pivotal legal victory in her ongoing financial dispute with her former manager, ensuring that her claims of Andra Day scores win over ex-manager, ‘civil theft’ claim moves ahead in a Los Angeles courtroom. A Los Angeles County judge has denied a bid by former manager Jeffrey Evans to dismiss the central “civil theft” allegation, allowing Day to proceed with her pursuit of funds she alleges were wrongfully pocketed.
The ruling, issued on Thursday by Judge Andrew Esbenshade, centers on a breach of contract lawsuit involving an estimated $1.6 million in contested funds. Specifically, the court ruled that Day “sufficiently” pled the allegation that Evans wrongfully withheld $575,486 from her publishing and master recording revenue.
Beyond the survival of the civil theft claim, the judge as well rejected Evans’ attempt to block the possibility of triple damages. The court found that the manager failed to demonstrate that Day had waited too long to seek such recovery, leaving the door open for a significantly higher financial judgment should the singer prevail at trial.
Attorneys for Day, James Sammataro and Benjamin Akley, described the ruling as a “significant win,” noting that it ensures the handling of the singer’s income will be subject to full scrutiny in court.
A Tale of Two Lawsuits: The Fight for Royalties
The legal battle is not a single action but a consolidated clash of two separate lawsuits filed within 24 hours of each other in October 2025. The conflict stems from a fractured professional relationship and a dispute over the expiration and terms of a management agreement.
Day filed her lawsuit on Oct. 7, 2025, following a period of investigation by her legal team. She alleges that her contracts with Evans, as well as his companies BassLine Management and Buskin Entertainment, were “exploitative” and that the management agreement officially expired on June 30, 2023. The singer claims that Evans only admitted to withholding funds after he was “caught red-handed.”
Jeffrey Evans, however, beat Day to the courthouse by a single day, filing his own complaint on Oct. 6, 2025. Evans contends that he is still entitled to commissions on recordings and compositions created before a 2018 contract revision. He further alleges that Day entered into a 2024 publishing deal with Kobalt that paid her more than $1 million, and that she failed to provide him with his 40 percent cut. According to Evans, Day has already recouped all monies owed to her and now owes him unpaid commissions and royalties exceeding $850,000.
The Financial Toll and Allegations of Greed
The details within Day’s filing paint a stark picture of financial instability juxtaposed with professional success. Despite being a Golden Globe Best Actress winner and a quadruple-platinum hitmaker, Day alleges that the siphoning of her funds left her in “financial ruins.”
The lawsuit claims that Evans failed to segregate her publishing income into a separate account and instead used her earnings to fund “extravagant travel.” Day alleges that by 2023, she was facing potential eviction and was unable to meet the monthly minimum payments on credit card debt totaling more than $300,000, leaving her without sufficient funds to tour.
Judge Esbenshade’s ruling highlighted a critical admission from the defense: in a December court filing, Evans admitted that his companies had “mistakenly withheld” the $575,486 and had agreed to return the money. The judge determined that, at this early stage, Day had made a viable claim that Evans intended to permanently deprive her of those funds.
Timeline of Legal Proceedings
The complexity of the case is reflected in the rapid succession of filings and the subsequent consolidation of the claims.
| Date | Event | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| June 30, 2023 | Contract Expiration | Alleged complete date of management agreement. |
| Oct. 6, 2025 | Evans Lawsuit | Manager sues for commissions and royalties. |
| Oct. 7, 2025 | Day Lawsuit | Singer sues for $1.6M in “stolen funds.” |
| Dec. (Year Unspecified) | Admission | Evans admits “mistakenly withholding” $575,486. |
| June 25 (Upcoming) | Trial Conference | Trial-setting conference scheduled in LA. |
What This Means for the Music Industry
This case underscores a recurring tension in the entertainment industry regarding the fiduciary duty of artist managers. When a manager controls the “pipes” through which royalties and publishing revenue flow, the lack of transparency can lead to devastating financial consequences for the artist, regardless of their commercial success.
The ability for the “civil theft” claim to move forward is particularly noteworthy. In many breach-of-contract cases, disputes are treated as simple accounting errors. However, by allowing the theft claim to proceed, the court is acknowledging the possibility of intentional misconduct, which opens the door to punitive measures like triple damages.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
The two lawsuits are now consolidated under Judge Esbenshade in downtown Los Angeles. The next confirmed step in the legal process is a trial-setting conference scheduled for June 25.
Do you have thoughts on artist-manager contracts and financial transparency in the music industry? Share this story and join the conversation in the comments below.
