FKA Twigs, whose real name is Tahliah Barnett, has escalated her ongoing legal dispute with actor Shia LaBeouf by accusing him of attempting to silence her through a contentious non-disclosure agreement (NDA) linked to their previous settlement.
In a recent filing submitted in Los Angeles, Twigs alleges that LaBeouf employed a confidential legal maneuver to demand an excessive payout, claiming she violated the NDA by making general remarks about feeling unsafe during an interview. This dispute originates from a 2025 settlement that resolved her initial 2020 lawsuit, in which she accused LaBeouf of sexual battery, assault, and emotional distress during their relationship.
Twigs’ legal team has contested LaBeouf’s allegations, arguing that the NDA’s provisions violate California’s Stand Together Against Non-Disclosure Act and should therefore be rendered unenforceable. She is now seeking a court ruling to invalidate the confidentiality clauses within the agreement.
This renewed legal confrontation follows LaBeouf’s recent withdrawal of his own complaint against Twigs, adding another chapter to their protracted conflict that has repeatedly resurfaced over the years.
Meanwhile, LaBeouf is also confronting new legal issues unrelated to this case. He was arrested in New Orleans after an altercation during Mardi Gras, where he allegedly engaged in a bar fight. Initially charged with two counts of simple battery, he later faced an additional charge connected to the same incident. Reports described him as throwing punches and using offensive language during the confrontation. He was released on a $100,000 bond and ordered to attend rehabilitation and undergo drug testing as part of the proceedings.
Twigs’ latest court documents further claim that LaBeouf himself publicly discussed their situation in an interview despite the NDA, which she argues undermines his position.
Their legal battle began in December 2020 when Twigs first filed her lawsuit. The case was settled out of court in 2025, just months before it was scheduled for trial. At that time, both parties issued a joint statement expressing their intention to “forge a constructive path forward.” However, the recent legal filings indicate that the dispute remains unresolved and continues to evolve.
