IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRIC COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

GREG HUDIK, )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Jury Demand
)
FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC, )
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY FOX, )
INC., and SASHA SAVITSKY, )
Defendants. )

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Greg Hudik, for his cause of action against the Defendants Fox News Network,

LLC, Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc., and Sasha Savitsky states as follows:

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff Greg Hudik is a citizen and resident of Davidson County, Tennessee. He is a

singer, songwriter, and musician and is the owner of Platinum Records Nashville.

2. The Defendant Fox News Network, LLC is an entity formed under the laws of Delaware.

Its principal place of business is located at 1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York

County, New York, 10036. Fox News Network is a wholly owned subsidiary of Twenty-

First Century Fox, Inc.

3. The Defendant Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc. is a corporation formed under the laws of

Delaware, with its principal place of business in New York County, New York.

4. Upon information and belief, the Defendant Sasha Savitsky is a citizen and resident of New

York County, New York. At the time of the allegations herein, she was employed as an

associate entertainment editor by the Defendants.

1
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1
 5. The acts or omissions alleged of herein occurred in Davidson County, Tennessee.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

6. Jurisdiction is conferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 relating to diversity of citizenship of the

parties because the parties are citizens of different states, and the amount in controversy

exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

7. Venue is proper in this Court because the Plaintiff’s injury and the acts and omissions

alleged of herein occurred in Davidson County, Tennessee, located in the Middle District.

ALLEGATIONS OF FACT

8. Plaintiff Greg Hudik is a songwriter, singer, musician, promoter and record producer in

Nashville, Tennessee. He played on the first MTV Spring Break concert in 1986, which

had over 80 million viewers, including 400,000 in live attendance at Daytona Beach,

Florida, where he recorded his first live album. He has been in the music industry for

almost 40 years and was first published by Sony Tree after moving to Nashville. Mr. Hudik

has written over 350 songs and demoed at least 250. Mr. Hudik wrote the first honky-tonk

gospel song performed by George Strait, who has more #1 Billboard songs than any artist

in any genre. Hudik wrote, “I Found Jesus On The Jailhouse Floor,” which was released

on the only George Strait record to debut #1 on the Billboard the first day of release.

George Strait and his manager Erv Woolsey published 63 of Mr. Hudik’s songs, and Sony

Tree has published over 40.

9. Mr. Hudik owns a record label named Platinum Records Nashville, LLC, which is

headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee. He has released seven singles nationally to radio

since 2016. He has 6 records that have been released nationally in the last three years. His

2
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 2
 song, “Music’s a Religion” went #2 on the country-gospel charts in 2018 and has remained

in the top-10 charts into 2019.

10. Daryle Singletary is one of the artists with whom Mr. Hudik worked to produce various

singles and recordings. Singletary was regarded as one of the best country voices of all

time. However, Mr. Singletary did not yet have a #1 hit on the country music Billboard.

11. Singletary released his self-titled album in 1995, and his lead-off single “I’m Living Up to

Her Low Expectations” spent only a week on the Top 40 on the Billboard country charts,

peaking at number 39. His biggest hit “I Let Her Lie” was number 2 on the charts.

12. Because Mr. Hudik believed in Mr. Singletary, he began producing recordings in an effort

to bring Singletary back onto the charts. The two were friends, and Hudik invested over

$30,000 into Singletary. In 2016, Hudik and Singletary recorded “We’re Not Going to Hell

(For Having a Hell of a Time)” and entered into a contract for Hudik to release Singletary’s

vocal performance, likeness, and photos for the song’s promotion. It was the first single

that Singletary had released in over a year.

13. When Mr. Hudik and Daryle Singletary were in the studio recording the last two songs that

Mr. Singletary would ever make, Mr. Singletary asked for an advance on payment. He

informed Mr. Hudik that he was struggling financially and had fallen on hard times. He

then tried to sell Mr. Hudik his watch.

14. Hudik hired Singletary to sing a song written and copyrighted by Hudik titled, “She’s Been

Cheatin’ On Us,” as well as another song, “I Wouldn’t Want To Be A Fly on the Wall.”

The two had been working on the mixes for the songs, and Hudik had been mastering the

recordings.

3
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 3 of 13 PageID #: 3
 15. Hudik spared no expense in mastering “She’s Been Cheatin’ On Us.” He hired JT

Corenflos to help build the tracks on the recording. Mr. Corenflos is one of the pre-eminent

session guitarists in Nashville, having received several ACM “Guitarist of The Year”

nominations and winning the title in 2012. He’s listed in Music Row Magazine as top 5

guitarist. He has played on over 100 #1 hit songs, including every Luke Bryant recording

and every hit.

16. On February 12, 2018, Daryle Singletary passed away suddenly at his home in Lebanon

after performing back-to-back shows and Mr. Hudik learned about Mr. Singletary’s passing

that morning.

17. On February 12, 2018, Hudik sent out an email blast to PlayMPE.com, an online music

promotion and delivery service that supplies songs to radio stations, with a copy of

Singletary’s latest single, “We’re Not Going to Hell For Having a Hell of a Time,”

accompanied by the following message to honor his friend:

“Platinum Records Nashville

Prayers today are for Daryle Singletary's family, friends, and fans.

The world lost a true legendary country music troubadour last night. Daryle
Singletary truly loved his family, friends, fans and his Lord Jesus Christ. Daryle's
seemed to be in great health and singing better than ever in the studio recently, went
I cut two new sides on him. When I heard the news of his passing this morning my
heart was crushed. In memory of you buddy I'm blasting your last single. Buddy
you passionately loved traditional country music, and country loves you.

I love you buddy, and I will miss you so much!

Greg Hudik”

18. Cognizant of the financial struggles that Mr. Singletary had mentioned prior to his passing,

Mr. Hudik decided that he would assist Daryle Singletary’s children and his wife, Holly,

4
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 4 of 13 PageID #: 4
 by releasing Singletary’s last recording “She’s Been Cheatin’ On Us,” and having all

proceeds go toward the Singletary family.

19. Mr. Hudik owned all the rights to “She’s Been Cheatin’ On Us” and had hired Singletary

to sing the song as a work-for-hire. The two were discussing the song as a potential single

prior to Singletary’s passing.

20. On February 13, 2018, Mr. Hudik sent another e-blast to PlayMPE stating that Platinum

Records wanted to release the unheard, new song sung by Singletary. Hudik stated that a

fund for the Singletary family would be created and that 100% of all digital downloads

would go toward that fund. Hudik then listed the song on iTunes so that it could be

downloaded.

21. No good deed goes unpunished.

22. Mr. Singletary had never spoken to Mr. Hudik about Chuck Rhodes, who later claimed to

be Mr. Singletary’s business partner. Hudik’s dealings were only with Singletary as

partners. Mr. Hudik had never even heard of Mr. Rhodes during the 40 years that he had

been in the music industry.

23. On or about February 13, 2018, Mr. Hudik received a phone call from Wayne Halper,

Chuck Rhodes’ attorney. Because “She’s Been Cheatin’ On Us” was a work-for-hire and

Singletary had not agreed to allow Hudik to use his likeness to be promoted, Halper

requested that Hudik take down the photographs that Singletary had agreed to allow Hudik

to use to promote “We’re Not Going To Hell (For Having A Hell Of A Time)” and to cease

using these photos to promote “She’s Been Cheatin’ On Us.”

24. Hudik immediately agreed to do so, and both he and Halper agreed that it would take time

for the release to be removed from Tunecore, the company that distributes songs to iTunes,

5
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 5 of 13 PageID #: 5
 Spotify, and other digital download partners. He immediately took down the Facebook

post promoting the song.

25. Mr. Hudik did not have Holly Singletary’s number, so he called Donna Lee at Buddy Lee

Attractions, whom he believed was Singletary’s Manager and Booking Agent, and the two

spoke about Mr. Singletary for approximately an hour. Donna Lee gave Greg Hudik

permission to use Singletary’s image on “She’s Been Cheatin’ On Us,” as well as to publish

her email and phone number in the email blast about the song and setting up the fund. Ms.

Lee informed Mr. Hudik that, in the meantime, she would speak with Holly Singletary to

confirm that she wanted this charity.

26. Based on his conversation with Wayne Halper and Donna Lee, on February 14, 2018, Mr.

Hudik sent out another media blast on PlayMPE.com under the same title “100% of ALL

downloads go to the Holly Singletary Fund Raiser.” He stated that Platinum Records and

Buddy Lee Attractions both wanted radio and the world to hear the last recordings of

Daryle Singletary and that they were working on a fund to 100% benefit the family from

the last recordings. Hudik instructed the radio stations not to download and spin “She’s

Been Cheatin’ On Us” and that he and Lee had mutually decided to hold off releasing the

recordings until the foundation was set up. Hudik then listed the contact information for

Donna Lee that she had provided to him, as well as the contact information for Platinum

Records.

27. Chuck Rhodes was apparently unaware of, or not satisfied with, Hudik’s retraction. On or

about February 14, 2018, Rhodes posted on his Facebook account that the release of “She’s

Been Cheatin’ On Us” was not approved or sanctioned by Holly Singletary, that the

recordings were “works for hire” in which Daryle Singletary was paid as a demo singer.

6
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 6 of 13 PageID #: 6
 A copy of Mr. Rhodes’ statement, is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Rhodes stated, “There

was also mention by Mr. Hudik of a ‘fund’ established with proceeds from downloads

going to Holly Singletary and Daryle’s family.” Rhodes stated, “At this time, no such fund

exists, and when established, will be sanctioned by the Singletary family and overseen by

Donna Lee at Buddy Lee Attractions.”

28. Mr. Hudik was in the process of setting up the Singletary fund on GoFundMe at the time.

29. On the morning of February 16, 2018, the Defendant Sasha Savitsky of Fox News emailed

Mr. Hudik:

“Hello,
Reaching out for comment regarding Chuck Rhodes’ cease and desist against Greg
Hudik at Platinum Records Nashville for releasing “She's Been Cheatin' on Us.”
Mr. Rhodes claims the song was just a demo that Daryle Singletary was paid to sing on
and that the Singletary family is not benefitting from the proceeds.
Would Mr. Hudik and/or Platinum Records Nashville like to comment?
Thank you,
Sasha
Sasha Savitsky
Associate Entertainment Editor”
30. Mr. Hudik spoke with Ms. Savitsky and explained that the fund had not been set up yet,

and confirmed that this is what he had stated in the prior e-blasts. Mr. Hudik stated that

his whole purpose of giving his song away was for the benefit of the Singletary family, and

if they truly did not want his charity, then he would comply with their wishes.

31. Mr. Hudik also explained that the song he was sharing was not merely a demo, and that it

had been totally mastered and mixed as a record. Hudik explained that Mr. Rhodes was

not familiar with the new, mastered version of the song and that it was not simply a demo.

32. Hudik informed Ms. Savitsky that Chuck Rhodes had asked him to take down “She’s Been

Cheatin’ On Us” from iTunes and various other outlets, and that he was complying with

7
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 7 of 13 PageID #: 7
 their demand. Hudik explained that it was a misunderstanding and that the issue was being

resolved to the satisfaction of Rhodes and the Singletary family. Hudik told her that this

was a charity of love for an artist that he truly loved and believed in.

33. On February 16, 2018, the Defendants posted an article titled, “Daryle Singletary's new

single is a scam, not benefiting his widow and kids, business partner says.” A copy is

attached hereto as Exhibit B. The article was posted on the front page of Fox News and

disseminated worldwide by radio and media. The Defendants’ article contains numerous

false statements and omissions which create a false, defamatory impression of and

concerning the Plaintiff. The title, alone, is defamatory, accusing Mr. Hudik of a scam,

when nothing of the sort was alleged or even implied by Chuck Rhodes.

34. The article states:

“On Wednesday, Platinum Records Nashville released "She's Been Cheatin' on Us," saying
the company was setting up a fund for the Singletary family and would donate 100 percent
of the proceeds to the fund.

However, Singletary's business partner Chuck Rhodes told Fox News that not only does
no such fund exist, but the single released by Platinum Records Nashville is not a song of
the late country singer.”

35. The statement attributed to Mr. Rhodes is false. First, Mr. Rhodes did not speak with Fox

News, he published an open post on Facebook in which he clearly indicated that Hudik’s

fund had not yet been established but was forthcoming. Rhodes stated “At this time, no

such fund exists, and when established […].” (emphasis added). The Defendant

Savitsky’s statement that “not only does no such fund exist” omits the fact that Hudik had

repeatedly stated that the fund was in the process of being set up, and that they were waiting

on clearance from the Singletary family before he did so. The Defendants’ omission of

these facts creates an entirely false and defamatory meaning. The Defendants’

8
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 8 of 13 PageID #: 8
 mischaracterization of Rhodes’ comments implies that Hudik was misappropriating funds

from a song that did not even involve Daryle Singletary, and accuses Hudik of faking

Singletary’s vocals or using a different singer.

36. The article selectively quotes from Rhodes’ statement to create a false and defamatory

impression. The Defendants state, “Rhodes, who has worked with Singletary for 21 years,

told Fox News the song was ‘never meant to be released’ and does not reflect ‘the Gold

standard that Daryle held himself to.’” In fact, Rhodes stated, “These songs were never

meant to be released as master recordings […].” Savitsky failed entirely to include

Hudik’s comments that the song was no longer a demo and that it had been mastered and

mixed as a master record. The omission of Hudik’s explanation created a false impression

that Singletary had actually rejected this song, when in fact nobody had yet heard the

mastered final cut. The Defendant Savitsky did nothing to clarify Chuck Rhodes’

Facebook comments prior to publishing the defamatory article.

37. Upon information and belief, the Defendant Savitsky did not even listen to the song prior

to publishing her story. Had she done so, she would have known that the mastered-version

of the song was no demo.

38. Hudik then forwarded Savitsky the February 14 e-blast that had been sent out to PlayMPE,

which clearly stated, “we’re working on a fund to 100% benefit the family from these last

recordings.” The e-blast clearly stated, “We both mutually decided to hold off releasing

these recordings until the foundation is set up.” Savitsky failed entirely to include these

statements in her article. She omitted them in order to create a false impression.

39. Hudik informed Savitsky:

“Sasha, I’ve worked hard my entire life for my dream. Chuck’s statement about my actions
were a scam are false. I clearly posted to all radio on 02/14/18 on this post you can see

9
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 9 of 13 PageID #: 9
 what it read not to spin this single until a foundation is set up. Chuck and radio both new
that a foundation hadn’t been set up yet. And radio in this post was told not to spin this
record until a fund had been set up.

This is ruining all that I’ve worked for and all that I’ve ever believed, is with hard work
and faith you can accomplish the dream that God put in your heart. You must share this
post in my behalf that the world new that there wasn’t a fund yet threw this post to all radio
on 02/14/18. PlayMPE is the service that record labels blast a new single out to radio with.

Sincerely I thank you

Greg Hudik:

40. Savitsky replied, “Hi Greg – thanks for sending me this information. We included your

side of the story with quotes explaining what you detailed here.” In fact, she did nothing

of the sort.

41. Hudik then reached out to Chuck Rhodes, who confirmed that he never accused Hudik of

a scam. He stated, “Greg, please review all statements I made. Not once did I imply or

use the word scam. That word came from Fox News. Please refer to Sasha at Fox 411 in

NY if you are concerned about the wording they used in their story. Again, I have been

very diligent and precise in the wording I used in my statement.”

42. On February 16, 2018, Hudik emailed Mr. Rhodes’ text messages to Sasha Savitsky in an

email titled, “The Word Scam.” Hudik stated:

“Sasha, I’m a recording artist with a label. I’ve worked my whole life in faith and belief in
God that my heart’s desires will come true. Chuck just messaged me a said not once did he
use the word scam. This has crushed my career and whatever retraction in my behalf on
this word scam can’t replace the damage in my life's dream and hard work has just been
crushed by a word not used by Chuck. He told me in this text the word Scam didn’t come
out of his mouth.
Sincerely

Greg Hudik

10
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 10 of 13 PageID #: 10
 43. Hudik received an automated out-of-office reply from Savitsky, stating she would be gone

until February 20.

44. On February 19, 2018, Savitsky replied to Hudik with the following:

“Hi Greg -
We updated our headline:
https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/02/16/daryle-
singletarys-news-single-is-scam-not-benefiting-his-widow-and-kids-business-partner-
says.amp.html
At this point, we are not planning future coverage to this story.” (Emphasis added).
45. The link still contains the word “scam,” which is listed in Internet search engines.

46. The only change to the article was the title, which now read, “Daryle Singletary's new

single not benefiting his widow and kids, business partner says.” The headline is still false.

Chuck Rhodes never said anything about the song not benefiting Singletary’s widow or

children. He merely stated that the fund had not been set up but was forthcoming. Savitsky

failed entirely to include any statement that Hudik had complied with Rhodes’ request that

he cease trying to establish any fund or charity.

47. The numerous false and misleading allegations in the original article still remained.

CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I: DEFAMATION

48. The Defendants published a story about Plaintiff on their websites with knowledge that the

statements contained therein were false and defaming to the Plaintiff or, at a minimum,

with reckless disregard for the truth of the statements or with negligence in failing to

ascertain the truth of the statements.

49. The import of the Defendants’ statements was to portray Plaintiff as a scam-artist and a

fraud, and falsely accused Plaintiff of conduct that is criminal by its nature. The

Defendants’ statements impugn the Plaintiffs’ profession, business, and trade.

11
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 11 of 13 PageID #: 11
 50. The website and the Defendants’ statements held Plaintiff up to public ridicule, contempt,

and scorn.

51. As a result of the Defendants’ misconduct, the Plaintiff’s reputation has been damaged.

52. Because these false allegations were posted on the Internet and contained within news

broadcasts, they constitute libel.

COUNT II: FALSE LIGHT

53. The statements and accusations of the Defendants presented publicity to a private matter

concerning Plaintiff and placed him before the public in a false light. The false light in

which Plaintiff was placed would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. The

Defendants had actual knowledge of or acted in reckless disregard to the falsity of the

publicized matter and the false light in which Plaintiff would be placed.

COUNT III: DEFAMATION BY IMPLICATION OR INNUENDO

54. The Defendants’ headlines create a false implication that Plaintiff has engaged in

misconduct amounting to fraud or conduct that is criminal by nature. The Defendants also

omitted facts which, if properly presented, would not have created a negative impression

of the Plaintiff.

55. The Defendants are therefore guilty of defamation by implication or innuendo.

DAMAGES

56. Plaintiff has been subjected to humiliation and has suffered emotional distress and a loss

of his reputation as a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ false and defamatory

publications, being placed in a false light, and because of the Defendants’ defamation by

implication or innuendo.

57. Plaintiff has incurred losses to his business, including lost revenue.

12
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 12 of 13 PageID #: 12
 58. The conduct of Defendants was intentional, malicious, or reckless. Consequently, all

Defendants must answer in both compensatory and punitive damages.

WHEREFORE, Premises Considered, Plaintiff prays:

1. That process issue, requiring the Defendants to answer in the time prescribed by law.

2. That Plaintiff be awarded a judgment from and against the Defendants for actual and

compensatory damages in an amount in accordance with the proof.

3. That Plaintiff be awarded his court costs and discretionary costs in this matter.

4. That judgment be rendered from and against the Defendants, jointly and severally, for all

economic and non-economic damages in an amount not to exceed ten million dollars

($10,000,000), and that Plaintiff further be awarded punitive damages in the amount of

fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000), or a greater amount proven at trial that is sufficient

to deter the Defendants and others from conduct of a similar nature.

5. For such other, general relief to which the Plaintiff is entitled.

Plaintiff demands a jury to try all issues so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

THE BLACKBURN FIRM, PLLC

/s/ Bryant Kroll

W. Gary Blackburn (#3484)
Bryant Kroll (#33394)
213 Fifth Avenue North, Suite 300
Nashville, TN 37219
P: (615) 254-7770
F: (866) 895-7272
gblackburn@wgaryblackburn.com
bkroll@wgaryblackburn.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

13
Case 3:19-cv-00127 Document 1 Filed 02/08/19 Page 13 of 13 PageID #: 13