Real Story Behind the Freddie Freeman Lawsuit and Karoline Leavitt Legal Cases Analysis of High-Profile Disputes

Let’s be honest—when you hear “Freddie Freeman lawsuit” and “Karoline Leavitt legal case” mentioned together, your first thought might be “Wait, what?” And you wouldn’t be wrong to be confused. The internet has a way of creating connections that don’t actually exist, which is exactly what happened here.

Here’s what really went down with these two completely separate legal stories, and why understanding the difference between real lawsuits and internet fiction matters more than you might think.

The Actual Freddie Freeman-Related Legal Drama

First things first—Freddie Freeman himself wasn’t suing anyone. But there was definitely some legal drama swirling around his 2022 move from Atlanta to Los Angeles.

The Real Case: Agent vs. Radio Host

The lawsuit that actually happened involved Freeman’s former agent Casey Close, who sued Fox Sports radio host Doug Gottlieb for libel, alleging Gottlieb “falsely and recklessly” defamed Close with a tweet claiming Close hadn’t presented a contract offer to Freeman during free agency.

Think about it—you’re a sports agent, and suddenly a major media personality is telling the world you didn’t do your job. That’s exactly the kind of situation that can destroy a professional reputation overnight. Close wasn’t having it.

How It All Unfolded

The whole mess started when Freeman left the Braves for the Dodgers. Fans were devastated, rumors flew, and Gottlieb jumped into the fray with what turned out to be an unverified claim on Twitter. Big mistake.

Doug Gottlieb apologized and deleted the tweet that led to the lawsuit, which shows you how quickly these social media disputes can escalate and then resolve when cooler heads prevail.

The lesson here? Even seasoned media professionals can get tripped up by the speed of social media. A single tweet cost Gottlieb a legal headache and probably some sleepless nights.

Related Lawsuit: Cardi B Boyfriend Stefon Diggs Paternity Lawsuit

Karoline Leavitt: Separating Truth from Internet Fiction

Now here’s where things get really interesting—and frustrating if you’re trying to find actual facts online.

The Misinformation Problem

You’ve probably seen headlines screaming about Leavitt suing “The View” for hundreds of millions of dollars. Here’s the thing: these claims are completely false and originated from fictional content creators on social media platforms.

This isn’t just “getting the facts wrong”—this is pure fabrication that’s been dressed up to look like real news. It’s become so widespread that multiple fact-checking organizations have had to step in to set the record straight.

What’s Actually Real

The only legitimate legal case involving Leavitt is her role as a defendant in Associated Press v. Budowich (2025), a lawsuit that began after Trump’s staff moved to block the Associated Press from certain press events.

This case is actually significant because it touches on fundamental questions about press freedom and government accountability. But it’s got nothing to do with daytime TV shows or massive settlements.

Why These Cases Matter for Legal Professionals and Everyone Else

The Freeman Case: Defamation in the Digital Age

Let’s talk about what makes the Close-Gottlieb situation legally significant. This wasn’t just hurt feelings—it was about professional reputation in an industry where trust is everything.

Key Legal Elements:

• False statements presented as fact: Gottlieb didn’t say “I think” or “maybe”—he presented his tweet as factual
• Professional harm: An agent’s reputation directly impacts their ability to earn a living
• Social media amplification: Twitter gave the statement instant, wide distribution

The quick resolution through apology and retraction is actually pretty common in defamation cases involving media personalities. It’s often more practical than dragging things out in court for years.

The Leavitt Situation: When Misinformation Goes Viral

The fake lawsuits attributed to Leavitt represent a growing problem in our information ecosystem. When fictional legal stories spread faster than real ones, it becomes harder for everyone to understand what’s actually happening in our courts.

This is particularly concerning when it involves government officials and press relations, where accurate information is crucial for democratic accountability.

What This Means for Media Professionals

If you’re working in media—traditional or social—these cases offer some hard-earned lessons:

Verification Is Everything

The Gottlieb situation shows how quickly unverified information can become a legal liability. Before you hit “publish” or “tweet,” ask yourself:

• Can I prove this is true?
• What are my sources?
• Could this harm someone’s reputation?

Correction Protocols Save Lives (and Lawsuits)

Notice how quickly Gottlieb’s apology and deletion helped resolve the situation? Having clear procedures for retractions isn’t just good journalism—it’s smart legal risk management.

Pro tip: If you’re running any kind of content operation, establish clear protocols for corrections. Speed matters when you mess up.

For Government Officials: Constitutional Guardrails

The legitimate Leavitt case raises important questions about how government officials interact with the press. Even in our polarized political climate, First Amendment protections remain robust.

Key considerations:

• Press access rights aren’t unlimited, but they can’t be arbitrarily restricted
• Administrative procedures matter—how you limit access can be as important as why
• Transparency and accountability go hand-in-hand with democratic governance

The General Public: Navigating Information Chaos

Here’s the reality check we all need: if a legal story sounds too crazy to be true, it probably is. The Leavitt fake lawsuit situation is a perfect example.

Red Flags to Watch For:

• Astronomical settlement amounts (like $800 million)
• Vague or missing source attribution
• Claims that seem designed more for clicks than information
• Stories that confirm your existing biases a little too perfectly

Better Information Habits:

• Check multiple reliable news sources
• Look for official court documents or legal filings
• Be suspicious of stories that only appear on social media
• When in doubt, wait—real legal news doesn’t disappear overnight

What’s Next: Ongoing Implications

For Defamation Law

The Freeman-related case, while resolved, reflects ongoing challenges in applying traditional defamation principles to social media communication. We’re likely to see more cases where single tweets or posts create significant legal liability.

For Government-Press Relations

The actual Leavitt case will probably set precedents for how the current administration handles press access. This matters regardless of your political views because it affects how information flows from government to the public.

For Information Quality

The misinformation surrounding both cases highlights a broader challenge: how do we maintain information quality when false stories can spread globally in minutes?

Practical Takeaways for Different Audiences

If You’re in Media:

• Implement strong verification procedures
• Have clear correction protocols
• Consider legal consultation for potentially controversial content
• Remember: employment law implications can arise from social media mistakes

If You Work in Government:

• Understand First Amendment constraints on press restrictions
• Follow proper administrative procedures for any media-related decisions
• Balance security needs with transparency requirements

If You’re Just Trying to Stay Informed:

• Verify before you share
• Check multiple sources
• Be aware that fake legal stories are increasingly common
• Understand the difference between real court proceedings and internet rumors

Frequently Asked Questions

Was there actually a Freddie Freeman lawsuit?

Not exactly. Freeman himself wasn’t a plaintiff in any lawsuit. His former agent Casey Close sued radio host Doug Gottlieb for allegedly making false statements about Close’s handling of Freeman’s contract negotiations. The case was resolved when Gottlieb retracted his statements and apologized.

Did Karoline Leavitt really sue “The View” for $800 million?

Absolutely not. This is completely fabricated. Multiple fact-checking organizations have confirmed this story is false. The only legitimate legal case involving Leavitt is her role as a defendant in a press access dispute with the Associated Press.

How can I tell if a legal story is real or fake?

Look for official court filings, check multiple reliable news sources, be suspicious of astronomical settlement amounts, and verify that the story appears in mainstream legal or news publications. If it sounds too outrageous to be true, it probably is.

What should media professionals learn from these cases?

The key lessons are: always verify information before publication, have clear protocols for retractions when errors occur, consider legal consultation for potentially controversial content, and understand that social media posts can create significant legal liability.

Why do fake legal stories spread so easily?

Fake legal stories often involve celebrities or political figures, include shocking details designed to generate emotional responses, and can spread through social media faster than fact-checkers can respond. They also often confirm people’s existing beliefs, making them more likely to be shared without verification.

How do these cases affect future defamation law?

The Freeman-related case demonstrates that traditional defamation principles apply to social media, but the speed and reach of platforms like Twitter can amplify both the harm and the legal consequences. We’re likely to see more cases where single social media posts create significant legal liability.

The Bottom Line

The supposed connection between Freddie Freeman lawsuits and Karoline Leavitt legal cases is a perfect example of how misinformation can create false narratives that spread faster than the truth.

The real stories here are actually more interesting than the fake ones:

• A sports agent successfully defending his professional reputation in the social media age
• The ongoing tension between government authority and press freedom
• The challenge of maintaining information quality in our digital ecosystem

Understanding these cases requires looking beyond the headlines to find the actual facts. In our current information environment, that’s becoming both more important and more challenging.

The takeaway? Whether you’re a legal professional, media worker, government official, or just someone trying to stay informed, developing better information literacy skills isn’t just helpful—it’s essential. The difference between real legal proceedings and internet fiction can have real consequences for how we understand our legal system and democratic institutions.

For more insights on navigating legal issues and understanding your rights, explore our comprehensive guides on family law, estate planning, and civil litigation.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal questions, consult with a qualified attorney in your jurisdiction.

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah