The man who says Kevin Hart falsely implicated him in a sex tape extortion scheme and then failed to “publicly exonerate” him as promised in a settlement agreement can no longer follow through his $12 million breach of contract lawsuit against Hart in open court, at least for now, a judge has ruled.

In a decision signed Thursday, Los Angeles County Judge Daniel S. Murphy ruled that plaintiff Jonathan “JT” Jackson forfeited his right to sue Hart in a public forum when he added a clause to their settlement agreeing to private arbitration .

Jackson had appeared in court Wednesday with his attorney, Daniel Reback, to argue that ratification of the entire settlement, including the arbitration clause, was contingent on Hart publicly exonerating Jackson from any extortion related to Hart’s highly publicized sex tape scandal in 2017. According to Jackson, Hart promised to post a lengthy, “carefully negotiated” statement on social media as a precursor to their contract, meant to “resolve all issues” without any “monetary compensation.” Reback said the readiness was outlined in a clause he underlined for emphasis in the final settlement signed in August 2021.

“Mr. Jackson insisted to me that the agreement would have a … clause where if Mr. Hart did not literally carry out the words that we negotiated, that all promises made by Mr. Jackson are voided, including this promise to arbitrate,” Reback argued in court Wednesday. The attorney also alleged that Jackson was fraudulently induced to sign the contract. He repeated the claim that Hart sent a “fabricated email” to falsely implicate Jackson in a racketeering offense Reback argued that the email submission was “likely calculated to take heat off of Hart for having a sex tape of his extramarital affair.” He said that “labeling JT as a blackmailer would distract the public. But it would also destroy JT’s life.” (Hart’s attorney did not respond to a request for comment about the judge’s decision and the allegation of the allegedly fabricated email.)

“This was an agreement to arbitrate any dispute, and this is a dispute, and it belongs in arbitration,” Hart’s attorney, Donte Mills, told the judge in court Wednesday. “It is clear that the plaintiffs in this matter are bent on trying to embarrass my client and file anything they can think of that is defamatory.”

“None of plaintiff’s arguments invalidate the arbitration clause itself,” Judge Murphy wrote in his ruling. He said the trial is now on hold pending the outcome of the arbitration.

Jackson submitted his underlying breach of contract lawsuit in July. He confirmed that he went with Hart on the August 2017 trip to Vegas where a video of Hart in bed with a model was recorded in Hart’s hotel room, but he was adamant that he did not blackmail Hart. (Parts of the sex tape were posted on the now-defunct website Fameolous.com but were later taken down.)

Jackson was arrested in April 2018 on suspicion of blackmailing Hart. The charges were eventually dropped. According to Jackson, Hart concocted the fake email demanding 20 bitcoins to prevent more of the recording from being released. He claims Hart “instigated” the theory to prosecutors that Jackson was behind the extortion. He also claimed the comedian hurt him again when he released a Netflix docu-series in 2019 that doubled down on the extortion claim even after the extortion charges were dropped. Jackson claimed that Hart later reached out to avoid a threatened defamation lawsuit and agreed to deliver the highly negotiated and scripted Instagram video statement that would “publicly exonerate” Jackson.

Jackson, a professional bowler and actor who had a minor role in Hart’s 2014 film Think like a man toosaid that Hart was required to note not only that the criminal charges against Jackson had been dismissed but that Jackson was cleared of any involvement in an extortion scheme and that the scandal had cost Hart “a valuable friendship”. Jackson claims that Hart expressly agreed saying, “I lost someone close to me that I loved and still have a great deal of love for, or high levels of love for, and I’m proud to say that all charges against JT Jackson have been dropped back, and he is not guilty and had nothing to do with it.” According to Jackson, 47, Hart “obviously” breached their agreement.

In her Instagram video, Hart said their friendship “disappeared,” but the statement seemed neutral. “It’s over, and I’m glad it’s over,” he said of the saga. Hart did not include the line that Jackson “had nothing to do with it.”

Before issuing his ruling, Judge Murphy said Wednesday that the defamation claim included in Jackson’s breach-of-contract lawsuit may not be covered by the agreement’s arbitration clause. If that occurs, that claim may come back to his court after the arbitration has concluded.