STREAMARCHIVERU
Tfue vs FaZe Clan: contract dispute and lawsuits
ClosedОбновлено August 26, 2026 at 05:38 AM

Tfue vs FaZe Clan: contract dispute and lawsuits

Tfue signed a Gamer Agreement with FaZe Clan on April 27, 2018. By fall 2018, his side was already arguing that the agreement could not automatically renew and was attempting to change or end the contractual relationship. On May 15, 2019, Tfue filed a petition with the California Labor Commissioner under the Talent Agencies Act, and on May 20 he sued FaZe Clan in Los Angeles Superior Court. He alleged that the contract contained excessively restrictive provisions, allowed FaZe to collect large percentages of certain commercial revenue, interfered with independent sponsorship opportunities, and that the organization had acted as an unlicensed talent agency. FaZe rejected Tfue's account, said it had actually received only about $60,000 from brand deals it had arranged, and stated that it had taken none of his tournament, Twitch, or YouTube revenue. After the public ReleaseTheContract campaign, a copy of the Gamer Agreement was published by the press. In August 2019, FaZe filed a separate federal lawsuit in New York accusing Tfue of breach of contract and related conduct. Proceedings continued across multiple jurisdictions into 2020. The parties settled all disputes in August 2020 without a trial on the central mutual allegations and without public disclosure of the settlement terms. Public personal interaction between Tfue and Banks resumed before the settlement, and in 2024 and 2025 Tfue, Banks, and FaZe again publicly joked about and discussed the old dispute.

TFParticipantTfueFCParticipantFaZe ClanLTParticipantLee TrinkFBParticipantFaZe BanksBFParticipantBryan FreedmanCBParticipantFaZe CBass

Timeline

57 events
Start of the conflictSCRIBD · INITIALVerified by the editors

Tfue and FaZe Clan entered into the Gamer Agreement

Turner Tenney and FaZe Clan entered into a Gamer Agreement effective April 27, 2018. The later-published agreement provided Tfue with a base payment of $2,000 per month, an initial six-month term, and a renewal mechanism. It also set different revenue shares for tournament winnings, brand deals, appearance fees, merchandise, and other income. The existence of those contractual rights does not mean FaZe actually collected every percentage permitted by the agreement. The exact signing time within the date was not established.

Gamer Agreement between FaZe Clan and Turner Tenney ↗
All sources2
1Gamer Agreement between FaZe Clan and Turner TenneyScribd · LinkPrimary source2Tfue's contract lays out revenue splits with FaZeESPN · LinkConfirmation
Checked April 26, 2018 at 06:00 PM
StatementU.S. DISTRICT COURT, SDNY · STATEMENTVerified by the editors

Tfue's attorney notified FaZe of a dispute over contract renewal

According to a later federal court order, Tfue's then-attorney sent FaZe a letter on September 26, 2018 arguing that the conditions required for automatic renewal of the Gamer Agreement for another 36 months had not been satisfied. FaZe and Tfue later disagreed about the legal effect of that notice.

FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney, Opinion and Order, Document 70 ↗
Checked September 25, 2018 at 06:00 PM
UpdateYOUTUBE · UPDATEPrimary source

FaZe later said it sent Tfue the first revised agreement

In an official 2019 video, FaZe representatives said the first revised agreement for Tfue was sent on September 28, 2018. According to the organization, it continued offering revised terms afterward. This is FaZe's retrospective account of the negotiations and does not independently verify the exact contents of every proposed contract.

YouTube01:42Video sourceA statement from FaZe Clan about contractsOpen on the platform ↗
Checked September 27, 2018 at 06:00 PM
ResponseU.S. DISTRICT COURT, SDNY · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

FaZe rejected Tfue's position and paid five overdue monthly payments

A later federal court order recorded that FaZe responded to the September notice on October 15, 2018 and called its demands unfounded. On the same date, FaZe paid five monthly installments of $2,000 covering May through September. The court noted that those payments had not been made by their contractual due dates. The significance of the late payments for automatic renewal later became part of the legal dispute.

FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney, Opinion and Order ↗
Checked October 14, 2018 at 06:00 PM
Start of the conflictCALIFORNIA LABOR COMMISSIONER FILING · INITIALVerified by the editors

Tfue filed a Petition to Determine Controversy with the California Labor Commissioner

Tfue initiated a separate administrative proceeding under California's Talent Agencies Act. He alleged that FaZe had procured and arranged commercial work for him without the required talent-agency license and asked for the agreement to be declared void along with related relief. At this stage, these were Tfue's allegations and not established violations.

Tenney v. FaZe Clan complaint with Labor Commissioner petition exhibit ↗
Checked May 14, 2019 at 07:00 PM
Start of the conflictLOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT · INITIALVerified by the editors

Tfue sued FaZe Clan in Los Angeles Superior Court

Tfue filed case 19STCV17341. The original complaint included claims for declaratory relief, unfair business practices, money had and received, quantum meruit, breach of written contract, and breach of fiduciary duty. Tfue alleged that the Gamer Agreement was excessively one-sided, contained unlawful restrictions on commercial activity, allowed FaZe to receive up to 80 percent of certain third-party payments, interfered with independent sponsorship deals, and that FaZe had acted as an unlicensed talent agency. The complaint also included allegations involving payments, sponsorship conflicts, alcohol consumption, gambling, and dangerous stunts. These were claims made by the plaintiff, not facts established by the court.

Turner Tenney v. FaZe Clan Inc., Complaint, 19STCV17341 ↗
All sources2
1Turner Tenney v. FaZe Clan Inc., Complaint, 19STCV17341Los Angeles Superior Court · LinkPrimary source2Pro gamer Tfue files lawsuit against esports org over grossly oppressive contractTechCrunch · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 20, 2019 at 04:08 AM
ResponseFAZE CLAN / X · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

FaZe Clan published its first official response to Tfue's lawsuit

FaZe said it was shocked and disappointed by the lawsuit. The organization stated that during Tfue's time with FaZe it had received $0 from his tournament winnings, Twitch revenue, YouTube revenue, and other social-platform income, and approximately $60,000 from brand deals that FaZe had arranged. FaZe also said it had offered Tfue improved contract terms. The statement describes amounts actually collected according to FaZe's own account and does not negate the percentages written into the Gamer Agreement.

Archive of FaZe Clan's first official response ↗
All sources2
1Archive of FaZe Clan's first official responseFaZe Clan / X · PostConfirmation2Tfue's lawsuit against FaZe Clan carries big implications for esports contractsWashington Post · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ResponseTHE VERGE ARCHIVE · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

Banks rejected the claim that FaZe took 80 percent of Tfue's tournament winnings

Banks wrote that FaZe had never taken 80 percent of Tfue's prize money and had actually received $0 from his tournament winnings. The post responded to widespread descriptions of the financial terms after the lawsuit. The Gamer Agreement did contain multiple percentage categories, so Banks' statement about money actually collected should be distinguished from the contractual rights written into the agreement.

Archive of Banks posts from May 20, 2019 ↗
Checked May 20, 2019 at 06:11 AM
ResponseX · RESPONSEPrimary source

Banks posted graphs showing Tfue's channel growth after joining FaZe

Banks wrote that he personally recruited Tfue in April 2018 and attached YouTube and Twitch growth graphs from after the relationship began. Banks used the publication as an argument about FaZe's contribution to Tfue's audience growth. The graphs themselves do not establish how much of that growth was caused by FaZe.

Public postBanks posted Tfue's YouTube and Twitch growth graphsOriginal post ↗
Checked May 20, 2019 at 08:45 AM
ResponseX · RESPONSEPrimary source

Banks said FaZe received $60,000 from $300,000 in brand deals

In another post, Banks acknowledged that the contract contained revenue splits for prize money, advertising, and other categories, but said FaZe had not enforced those shares except for 20 percent of brand deals the organization brought to Tfue. According to Banks, FaZe's total revenue from those deals was $60,000 out of $300,000.

Public postBanks clarified the amount FaZe said it actually receivedOriginal post ↗
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryYOUTUBE · STATEMENTPrimary source

Banks gave a long DramaAlert interview about the dispute

DramaAlert released a dedicated episode featuring an interview with Banks. He rejected the core allegations made by Tfue, discussed recruiting him, described the financial relationship, and spoke about feeling personally betrayed by the lawsuit. The interview represents Banks' public position and does not independently establish the disputed facts.

YouTube04:36Video sourceTfue LAWSUIT against FaZe Clan! DramaAlert FaZe Banks Interview!Open on the platform ↗
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
StatementYOUTUBE · STATEMENTPrimary source

Banks released Dear Tfue

Banks published an emotional video titled Dear Tfue on his own YouTube channel. He discussed his former friendship with Tfue, denied several allegations in the complaint, argued that FaZe had helped Tfue's career, and said he felt personally betrayed. Banks said he could not forgive the way the dispute had been brought into public view. The video reflects Banks' position during the opening hours of the conflict.

YouTube01:42Video sourceDear TfueOpen on the platform ↗
All sources2
1Dear TfueYouTube · VideoPrimary source2FaZe Banks explains why he'll never forgive TfueDexerto · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryYOUTUBE · REACTIONPrimary source

Ninja published a full reaction to the Banks interview

Ninja released a video longer than 35 minutes reacting to the Banks interview on DramaAlert. Topics included streamer contracts and circumstances in which an esports organization might block a sponsorship opportunity. This is commentary from an outside streamer and does not represent the position of Tfue or FaZe.

YouTube02:18Video sourceNinja Reacts To DramaAlert Faze Banks Interview about Tfue Lawsuit FULL REACTIONOpen on the platform ↗
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryDEXERTO · REACTIONVerified by the editors

Nadeshot expressed concern about perceptions of other esports organizations

Nadeshot wrote that he hoped the news would not affect how audiences viewed every esports organization, noting that some organizations place players and content creators first. The post did not make a factual determination that either Tfue or FaZe was correct.

Banks and Blaze slam Nadeshot for comments about Tfue suing FaZe Clan ↗
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryDEXERTO · REACTIONVerified by the editors

Banks sharply responded to Nadeshot and later deleted the post

Banks publicly responded to Nadeshot, accused him of prematurely joining criticism of FaZe, and used harsh language. Contemporary reporting indicates that the post was later deleted. The exchange created a short separate public branch around the main conflict.

Archive of Banks' deleted response to Nadeshot ↗
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryDEXERTO · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

Nadeshot apologized to FaZe for becoming involved

After Banks responded, Nadeshot posted an apology and said his earlier posts had been a mistake and that he had inserted himself into the situation unnecessarily. The apology concerned his public comments, not the merits of Tfue's contract claims.

Coverage of Nadeshot's subsequent apology ↗
Checked May 19, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ResponseX · RESPONSEPrimary source

FaZe clarified its position on the contract's 80 percent provision

In an additional statement, FaZe acknowledged that the Gamer Agreement contained a provision allowing the organization to receive up to 80 percent of certain brand income, but said it had never applied that maximum share to Tfue. The organization also said it had been trying for months to replace the original contract.

Public postAdditional FaZe Clan statement regarding Tfue's contractOriginal post ↗
All sources2
1Additional FaZe Clan statement regarding Tfue's contractX · PostPrimary source2TechCrunch coverage of FaZe clarificationTechCrunch · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 20, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ReactionTHE PHILIP DEFRANCO SHOW · REACTIONVerified by the editors

Philip DeFranco dedicated a segment to the Tfue and FaZe case

The Philip DeFranco Show published material about the lawsuit's possible implications for the entertainment and esports industries. The episode discussed Tfue's allegations, Banks' and FaZe's responses, and the legal structure of the conflict. This is third-party commentary.

The TFue FaZe Clan Lawsuit Could Change The Future Of Entertainment ↗
Checked May 20, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ResponseYOUTUBE · RESPONSEPrimary source

Tfue released My Response and launched ReleaseTheContract

Tfue made his first detailed public statement after the lawsuit became public. He said he wanted the dispute to focus on the contract and asked FaZe to allow the Gamer Agreement to be shown publicly. Tfue also said that allegations involving drinking, gambling, and dangerous stunts were not what he wanted the dispute to center on and that he had asked his attorney to remove them. This is Tfue's statement about instructions to his attorney and does not by itself establish that those allegations were immediately removed from the filed pleadings.

YouTube02:18Video sourceMy Response #ReleaseTheContractOpen on the platform ↗
All sources2
1My Response #ReleaseTheContractYouTube · VideoPrimary source2Tfue presses his esports team to ReleaseTheContractEngadget · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 21, 2019 at 07:00 PM
UpdateTHE BLAST · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The Blast published a copy of Tfue's Gamer Agreement

The Blast said it obtained the contract from a source not connected to FaZe and published its contents. ESPN separately confirmed the authenticity of the copy it received. Terms included a 20 percent share of tournament winnings for FaZe, 50 percent of in-game merchandise, 50 percent of certain deals found by Tfue himself, up to 80 percent of deals found by FaZe, and shares of appearance and merchandise revenue. Publication of the agreement allowed the written contractual terms to be separated from the question of which percentages FaZe actually enforced.

Fortnite Gamer Tfue's Contract with FaZe Clan Finally Revealed ↗
All sources3
1Fortnite Gamer Tfue's Contract with FaZe Clan Finally RevealedThe Blast · LinkConfirmation2Tfue's contract lays out revenue splits with FaZeESPN · LinkConfirmation3Gamer AgreementScribd · LinkPrimary source
Checked May 22, 2019 at 11:04 PM
ResponseESPN · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

Banks said Tfue's original contract was bad and pointed to revised offers

After the agreement was published, Banks publicly acknowledged that Tfue's original contract was bad, but said FaZe had spent the previous year offering multiple replacements, including versions with no revenue splits. He continued to argue that the dispute did not reflect the amounts FaZe had actually collected.

ESPN reconstruction of Banks response to leaked contract ↗
All sources2
1ESPN reconstruction of Banks response to leaked contractESPN · LinkConfirmation2FaZe Clan Owner Banks Admits Tfue's Contract Was TrashYahoo / The Blast · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 22, 2019 at 07:00 PM
StatementDEXERTO · STATEMENTVerified by the editors

Banks said FaZe offered Tfue a $1 million-per-year deal with zero splits

Banks said FaZe had offered Tfue a contract worth approximately $1 million per year with zero revenue splits, under which Tfue's main obligation would have been representing FaZe. Public materials confirm that Banks made the claim, but the complete unsigned version of that proposed contract was not found because it was an offer rather than an executed agreement.

Tfue gives first public statement, Banks responds ↗
Checked May 22, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryYOUTUBE · REACTIONPrimary source

PewDiePie released a Pew News episode about the Tfue and FaZe dispute

PewDiePie published a separate episode titled Tfue is NOT happy with Faze Clan. He discussed the Gamer Agreement, the public responses from both sides, and the question of why the organization continued to hold Tfue to the relationship after cooperation had broken down. The material is third-party commentary.

YouTube04:36Video sourceTfue is NOT happy with Faze CLan - PEW NEWSOpen on the platform ↗
Checked May 22, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryPEDESTRIAN · REACTIONVerified by the editors

KEEMSTAR reported that Tfue allegedly planned to create his own esports organization

KEEMSTAR wrote that two sources, including someone he described as Tfue's brother, told him Tfue intended to create his own organization. This was a public report by a commentator based on unnamed or partly described sources, not a confirmed fact. Tfue later directly denied that intention.

Archive of KEEMSTAR's claim about Tfue starting his own organization ↗
Checked May 22, 2019 at 07:00 PM
StatementYOUTUBE · STATEMENTPrimary source

FaZe Clan released an official video about contracts

FaZe published a video featuring CBass and Lee Trink. The organization said it had been trying to revise Tfue's deal since September 2018, had offered seven-figure annual compensation and zero-split options, and repeated that it had actually received about $60,000. FaZe also said the term in-game items in the Gamer Agreement did not refer to Fortnite Support-A-Creator revenue. That public interpretation was later directly considered by the federal court when addressing FaZe's Support-A-Creator revenue claim.

YouTube02:18Video sourceA statement from FaZe Clan about contractsOpen on the platform ↗
All sources2
1A statement from FaZe Clan about contractsYouTube · VideoPrimary source2FaZe Clan offered Tfue a seven-figure salary with a zero percent splitPCGamesN · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 22, 2019 at 07:00 PM
CommentaryDEXERTO · STATEMENTVerified by the editors

Lee Trink said on DramaAlert that Tfue wanted to create a competing organization

In a DramaAlert interview, FaZe CEO Lee Trink said Tfue was not interested in signing a new agreement and instead wanted to leave FaZe and create a competing organization. This was FaZe's position. Tfue later publicly denied that he planned to start his own esports company.

FaZe Clan CEO reveals Tfue's alleged intentions behind lawsuit ↗
Checked May 22, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ReactionYOUTUBE · REACTIONPrimary source

theScore esports published a separate analysis of the leaked contract and FaZe's response

theScore esports released a video focused specifically on the Gamer Agreement and FaZe's new official response. The material distinguished verified contract provisions from the continuing public allegations between the parties. This is third-party commentary.

YouTube01:42Video sourceTfue vs FaZe Clan: The Alleged Leaked Contract and FaZe's Response ExplainedOpen on the platform ↗
Checked May 23, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ResponseWIN.GG · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

Tfue denied plans to create his own esports organization

During the Konkrete Podcast, Tfue directly rejected the public claim that he planned to create a competing organization. He said he had never stated that intention and did not have time to run a company. Tfue also again called signing the original agreement a mistake and advised other creators to seek independent legal advice.

Tfue denies FaZe Clan claims that he wants to start his own team ↗
All sources2
1Tfue denies FaZe Clan claims that he wants to start his own teamWin.gg · LinkConfirmation2Tfue finally addresses rumors of starting his own esports orgDexerto · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 28, 2019 at 07:00 PM
StatementYOUTUBE · STATEMENTPrimary source

Tfue's attorney publicly explained the legal position in a theScore esports interview

theScore esports published a separate video based on an interview with Tfue's attorney Bryan Freedman. The material discussed the Gamer Agreement, the public $60,000 figure, and Tfue's legal strategy. It represents a public continuation of Tfue's legal position.

YouTube04:36Video sourceTfue's Lawyer Reveals Shocking New Info on FaZe Clan LawsuitOpen on the platform ↗
Checked June 13, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ResponseU.S. DISTRICT COURT, SDNY · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

FaZe Clan filed a federal lawsuit against Tfue in New York

FaZe Clan filed case 1:19-cv-07200 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The organization accused Tfue of breach of contract and alleged unpaid shares of sponsorship revenue, disparagement, disclosure of confidential information, interference with business relationships, and attempts to influence other FaZe members. The original complaint also included claims involving trade secrets, tortious interference, commercial disparagement, and unjust enrichment. FaZe alleged that Tfue had earned as much as $20 million after joining the organization. All of these were allegations made by the plaintiff and were not established as facts by filing the complaint.

FaZe Clan Inc. v. Turner Tenney, Complaint, Document 1 ↗
All sources2
1FaZe Clan Inc. v. Turner Tenney, Complaint, Document 1U.S. District Court, SDNY · LinkPrimary source2FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney docketJustia · LinkPrimary source
Checked July 31, 2019 at 07:00 PM
StatementESPN · STATEMENTVerified by the editors

FaZe publicly explained its decision to file the federal lawsuit

After filing the case, FaZe representatives said that attempts to resolve the dispute privately had failed and that the organization believed litigation was necessary. FaZe continued to argue publicly that Tfue had breached a valid Gamer Agreement. This was the organization's position before judicial review.

FaZe files suit against Tfue in New York ↗
Checked July 31, 2019 at 07:00 PM
ResponseYOUTUBE · RESPONSEPrimary source

Tfue's attorney publicly responded to FaZe's federal lawsuit

theScore esports published material featuring Bryan Freedman's response to FaZe's lawsuit. Tfue's attorney publicly mocked parts of the complaint and continued defending Tfue's position regarding the Gamer Agreement and California law. This is a statement from Tfue's representative, not a judicial conclusion.

YouTube04:36Video sourceTfue's Lawyer SLAMS FaZe Clan's LawsuitOpen on the platform ↗
Checked August 20, 2019 at 07:00 PM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

Tfue asked the federal court to dismiss or stay the New York case

Tfue filed a motion seeking dismissal or a stay of the federal case in favor of the California proceedings. The motion was part of the dispute over which jurisdiction should hear the main Gamer Agreement issues.

FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney docket ↗
Checked October 7, 2019 at 07:00 PM
UpdateU.S. DISTRICT COURT, SDNY · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The federal court refused to dismiss the New York case in favor of California

Judge Jed Rakoff denied Tfue's motion for dismissal or a stay under the Colorado River doctrine. The court concluded that the high standard required for a federal court to decline its jurisdiction had not been met. This was a procedural ruling about the forum and continuation of the case, not a final ruling on whether the Gamer Agreement was lawful.

FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney, Document 27 ↗
Checked November 5, 2019 at 07:00 PM
UpdateLOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The California court enforced the forum-selection clause in favor of New York

Los Angeles Superior Court granted FaZe's motion to dismiss or stay on forum non conveniens grounds subject to conditions. The court treated the forum-selection clause as mandatory and required FaZe to agree that California law would apply to non-waivable statutory claims. The ruling did not establish FaZe's position as correct on the merits and separately recognized the Labor Commissioner's original jurisdiction over Talent Agencies Act issues.

Turner Tenney v. FaZe Clan Inc., Minute Order, December 6 2019 ↗
Checked December 6, 2019 at 03:30 AM
ResponseJUSTIA · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

Tfue filed an amended answer and counterclaims in the federal case

After the jurisdictional rulings, Tfue filed an amended answer and his own counterclaims in SDNY. The parties' main contractual claims were therefore concentrated in the New York federal case, while separate California statutory issues retained their own procedural significance.

Docket entry for amended answer and counterclaims ↗
Checked December 12, 2019 at 07:00 PM
UpdateDEXERTO · UPDATEVerified by the editors

Tfue and Banks publicly appeared together for the first time since the lawsuit

Banks posted an Instagram Story showing himself with Tfue. Dexerto documented it as their first public appearance together since the lawsuit began. The litigation was still ongoing at the time. The photo confirms renewed personal public interaction but does not establish that the legal dispute had been settled.

FaZe Banks and Tfue reunite publicly for first time since lawsuit ↗
Checked January 31, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateX · UPDATEPrimary source

Banks publicly suggested returning to their previous relationship

In response to a Tfue post about his personal life, Banks wrote Let's just all go back to how things were. The message did not address the legal claims directly, but it confirms continued friendly public interaction after their February meeting.

Public postBanks: Let's just all go back to how things wereOriginal post ↗
All sources2
1Banks: Let's just all go back to how things wereX · PostPrimary source2Coverage of renewed interaction between Banks and TfueDexerto · LinkConfirmation
Checked February 4, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

FaZe filed a motion for partial summary judgment

FaZe asked the federal court to resolve several issues before trial through partial summary judgment. The filing became part of the parties' competing summary-judgment motions and was not itself a court ruling.

FaZe motion for partial summary judgment ↗
Checked March 4, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

Tfue filed his own motion for partial summary judgment

The next day, Tfue also asked the court for partial summary judgment on contract issues and the parties' competing claims. Both sides were asking the court to decide some legal issues without a full jury trial.

Tfue motion for partial summary judgment ↗
Checked March 5, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The parties voluntarily dismissed part of their mutual claims

FaZe and Tfue signed a stipulation narrowing the issues before trial. FaZe dismissed with prejudice its trade-secret claim, part of its intentional-interference claim relating to other gamers and media personalities, and its commercial-disparagement claim. FaZe retained the interference claim relating to brand deals and sponsors. Tfue withdrew a fraud defense and his breach-of-fiduciary-duty counterclaim. Other claims remained pending.

Stipulation and dismissal of certain claims, counterclaims and defenses ↗
Checked March 19, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateU.S. DISTRICT COURT, SDNY · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The federal court issued a mixed ruling on the summary judgment motions

Judge Jed Rakoff granted FaZe's motion only in part, awarding summary judgment on Tfue's personal-jurisdiction defense while denying the other requests by FaZe that were addressed. Tfue's motions were denied. The court did not issue a general ruling declaring one side the winner in the contract dispute. On Support-A-Creator revenue, the court noted ambiguity in the phrase in-game merchandise and referred to FaZe's May 2019 public video stating that the Gamer Agreement did not apply to Support-A-Creator revenue. The court also found factual issues concerning California Business and Professions Code section 16600 and other claims. The Talent Agencies Act issue was not decided on the merits because original jurisdiction belonged to the California Labor Commissioner.

FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney, Opinion and Order, June 17 2020 ↗
Checked June 16, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The federal court scheduled a jury trial for October 2020

After the summary-judgment order, the court scheduled a jury trial for October 5, 2020. The scheduling confirmed that disputed claims remained after the June ruling and required further proceedings.

Trial scheduling entry in FaZe Clan Inc. v. Tenney ↗
Checked June 23, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateFORBES · UPDATEVerified by the editors

Tfue's California civil case was dismissed in favor of the contractual forum

The California court dismissed Tfue's civil action after earlier rulings concerning the forum-selection clause and the treatment of the main contractual issues in New York. This procedural dismissal was not a merits ruling establishing FaZe's position as correct on all of Tfue's allegations. The Talent Agencies Act issue had its own separate administrative procedural basis.

Settlement report noting dismissal of California complaint ↗
Checked July 9, 2020 at 07:00 PM
OutcomeFORBES · RESOLUTIONVerified by the editors

Tfue and FaZe Clan announced settlement of all litigation

Legal representatives for the parties issued a joint statement saying that FaZe Clan and Turner Tenney had resolved their differences and settled their litigations. The parties wished each other success in the future. The amount of any payment and the other settlement terms were not publicly disclosed. The settlement ended the dispute without a trial and without a final judicial ruling on the parties' central mutual allegations. Tfue was no longer bound by the disputed FaZe agreement.

Fortnite Star Tfue Settles Dispute With FaZe Clan ↗
All sources3
1Fortnite Star Tfue Settles Dispute With FaZe ClanForbes · LinkConfirmation2Bryan Freedman Client Tfue Settles Lawsuits With FaZe ClanBryan Freedman · LinkPrimary source3FaZe and Tfue have settled their lawsuit and said goodbyeEngadget · LinkConfirmation
Checked August 26, 2020 at 08:59 AM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The parties filed a stipulation dismissing the federal case with prejudice

A joint stipulation of voluntary dismissal with prejudice was filed in SDNY. It covered the parties' remaining claims and counterclaims and formally reflected the settlement in the federal action.

August 26 2020 stipulation of voluntary dismissal with prejudice ↗
Checked August 25, 2020 at 07:00 PM
UpdateJUSTIA · UPDATEVerified by the editors

The court signed the dismissal of the federal case

Judge Jed Rakoff signed the stipulation, after which the remaining claims and counterclaims of FaZe Clan and Tfue were dismissed with prejudice. This formally ended the federal case following the settlement.

August 27 2020 signed dismissal ↗
Checked August 26, 2020 at 07:00 PM
ReactionSPORTS LITIGATION ALERT · REACTIONVerified by the editors

Sports Litigation Alert published a legal retrospective on the case

After the settlement, Sports Litigation Alert published a legal analysis of the multi-forum dispute, including proceedings before the California Labor Commissioner, Los Angeles Superior Court, and SDNY. The article did not contain a new action by the parties but documented the procedural significance of the case for esports contract litigation.

Three Venues, Two Jurisdictions, and One Settlement ↗
Checked October 22, 2020 at 07:00 PM
StatementSPORTS ILLUSTRATED · STATEMENTVerified by the editors

Sports Illustrated reported that Tfue and Banks had reconciled

In a large profile of FaZe Clan, Sports Illustrated retrospectively reported that the lawsuit had been settled and that Tfue and Banks had reconciled. Banks again described his emotional public reaction in 2019 as reflecting his direct communication style and repeated that he believed FaZe had been right at the time. The material confirms that the personal public relationship between Tfue and Banks did not remain openly hostile after the settlement.

The Stream Team ↗
Checked June 9, 2021 at 07:00 PM
UpdateX · UPDATEPrimary source

FaZe Clan publicly suggested running it back with Tfue

After changes to FaZe's structure and leadership, the organization's official account posted an image featuring Tfue and asked the audience whether the sides should run it back. The post directly revived the public subject of Tfue's relationship with FaZe almost four years after the settlement.

Public postFaZe Clan suggested running it back with TfueOriginal post ↗
All sources2
1FaZe Clan suggested running it back with TfueX · PostPrimary source2FaZe Clan hints at Tfue's returnDexerto · LinkConfirmation
Checked June 30, 2024 at 07:00 PM
ResponseDEXERTO · RESPONSEVerified by the editors

Tfue replied to FaZe with an 80/20 revenue-split joke

Tfue quote-posted FaZe's suggestion of a possible return and wrote that this time he should receive 80 while the organization gets 20. The wording clearly referenced the central controversy over revenue splits in the 2018 Gamer Agreement. The post was humorous and does not itself confirm that new contract negotiations were taking place.

Archive of Tfue's response to FaZe ↗
All sources2
1Archive of Tfue's response to FaZeDexerto · PostConfirmation2Tfue may join FaZe Clan again after contract disputeWin.gg · LinkConfirmation
Checked July 1, 2024 at 07:00 PM
ReactionDEXERTO · REACTIONVerified by the editors

Banks answered Tfue's 80/20 joke with his own comment about previous terms

Banks replied that Tfue's proposed 80/20 would have been better than what Banks said he himself had, and referenced a 0/100 arrangement. The post is a joking continuation of the discussion about old internal FaZe contractual relationships. It does not independently establish Banks' exact historical contract terms.

Coverage of Banks' reply to Tfue ↗
Checked July 1, 2024 at 07:00 PM
ReactionDEXERTO · REACTIONVerified by the editors

Tfue replied to Banks with laughing emojis

Tfue separately responded to Banks' comment with laughing emojis. The post contained no new statement about the contract but confirms continued friendly public interaction between the former parties to the personal conflict branch.

Archive of the continued Tfue and Banks exchange ↗
Checked July 1, 2024 at 07:00 PM
UpdateYOUTUBE · UPDATEPrimary source

Tfue published a video about another reunion with FaZe Banks

Tfue's verified YouTube channel published a short video titled Tfue and Faze Banks reunited. The upload confirms additional personal public interaction between the two years after the settlement. The available metadata does not indicate any renewed legal dispute.

YouTube01:42Video sourceTfue and Faze Banks reunitedOpen on the platform ↗
Checked December 16, 2024 at 07:00 PM
StatementYOUTUBE · STATEMENTPrimary source

Tfue again discussed the FaZe fallout in detail on IMPAULSIVE

Tfue appeared on IMPAULSIVE, where a dedicated segment discussed ReleaseTheContract and his former conflict with FaZe. The official episode metadata explicitly labels a segment as Faze Banks Fallout and places the FaZe discussion at approximately 54:27. This is a new retrospective public discussion by Tfue nearly five years after the settlement.

YouTube02:18Video sourceTfue Exposes Ninja For Ruining His Fortnite Career, Faze Banks Fallout, Dating His Assistant - 458Open on the platform ↗
All sources2
1Tfue Exposes Ninja For Ruining His Fortnite Career, Faze Banks Fallout, Dating His Assistant - 458YouTube · VideoPrimary source2IMPAULSIVE episode 458Apple Podcasts · LinkConfirmation
Checked May 27, 2025 at 03:19 PM
StatementTMZ · STATEMENTVerified by the editors

Banks named Tfue as one of the streamers on his Mount Rushmore

In a TMZ interview, Banks included Tfue among the creators he would place on his broader list of the most notable streamers, alongside other major creators. The publication does not discuss the legal dispute in detail, but it is a later direct public mention of Tfue by Banks and contains no hostile rhetoric toward him.

Banks Praises Kai Cenat, Speed and names his streamer Mount Rushmore ↗
Checked October 18, 2025 at 07:15 PM
Latest updateReactionOPENCLASSACTIONS · REACTION2 confirmations

OpenClassActions published a new legal reconstruction of the Tfue and FaZe dispute

OpenClassActions published a separate retrospective on the streamer contract dispute. The article emphasizes that the case ended in settlement rather than a merits verdict and that Tfue's and FaZe's allegations remained competing claims. The publication contains no new direct statement from Tfue, FaZe, or Banks and does not report a new legal proceeding.

FaZe Clan vs Tfue: The Streamer Contract Lawsuit That Settled in 2020 ↗
Checked July 12, 2026 at 07:00 PM
6
Shared participants: FaZe BanksFaZe Banks vs. CORE Boys / Marlon: profitability dispute, private messages and personal attacks6 events · updated September 11, 2026 at 03:39 PMShared participants: FaZe BanksJake Paul vs FaZe Banks: Warwick Assault Allegation, Counterclaims and Reconciliation22 events · updated August 28, 2026 at 07:38 AMShared participants: NinjaPokimane vs JiDion: hate raid, Twitch ban and reconciliation42 events · updated August 26, 2026 at 05:34 AMShared participants: KEEMSTARiDubbbz vs LeafyIsHere: Content Cop, Bullying Criticism and 2020 Revival16 events · updated August 30, 2026 at 04:38 AMShared participants: KEEMSTARiDubbbz vs RiceGum: Content Cop, Diss Tracks and the Failed Boxing Match19 events · updated August 28, 2026 at 06:40 AMShared participants: PewDiePieTati Westbrook vs James Charles: Bye Sister and No More Lies58 events · updated August 26, 2026 at 01:32 PM