Nelly has a legal battle on his hands and it’s with his own bandmates, The St. Lunatics. 

Full story below…

Billboard reports that the rapper’s group filed a lawsuit against the St. Louis native over royalties from his debut studio album ‘Country Grammar.’

Per the suit, the group alleges that the MC “manipulated” into believing they would be compensated for their work on the 2000 LP – which reigned atop the Billboard 200 for five weeks. However, 24 years later, they allege no such funds have come to fruition.

An excerpt from the filing read:

“Every time plaintiffs confronted defendant Haynes [he] would assure them as ‘friends’ he would never prevent them from receiving the financial success they were entitled to,” the lawsuit reads. “Unfortunately, plaintiffs, reasonably believing that their friend and former band member would never steal credit for writing the original compositions, did not initially pursue any legal remedies.

Despite repeatedly promising plaintiffs that they would receive full recognition and credit… it eventually became clear that defendant Haynes had no intention of providing the plaintiffs with any such credit or recognition,” the group’s attorneys write.”

The suit is spearheaded by members Ali (Ali Jones), Murphy Lee (Tohri Harper), Kyjuan (Robert Kyjuan), and City Spud (Lavell Webb); all of who say they carried out more work on the project they were credited or compensated for.

Slo Down (Corey Edwards), another former member of the group, is not part of the legal pursuit.

Beginning as a group of high school friends from St. Louis, the St. Lunatics garnered buzz on the local scene before blowing up in the wake of Nelly’s success. Indeed, their debut album, ‘Free City,’ was released a year after ‘Country Grammar’ and peaked at #3 on the Billboard 200.

Word is that the suit is being presented as an infringement case, with the core of the argument being that Nelly allegedly used the group’s songs without permission. It’s suggested, however, that the MC’s attorneys are likely to counter that it’s really a dispute about ownership – which could prove tricky for the group, as with that angling, their claims could be time-barred.

Your thoughts?