Summer Walker and Interscope Records are locked in a legal dispute after the singer-songwriter moved to end her record deal and the label responded with a lawsuit alleging she could owe $50 million.

Walker sent Interscope a notice of termination in August. The label filed its complaint on Friday, Oct. 9, alleging that she has not delivered all the albums promised under the agreement and would be liable for damages if she exits early.

The dispute centers on a joint deal Walker signed in 2017 with Interscope, a Universal Music Group subsidiary, and label and management company LVRN. Interscope says the contract required five albums, while Walker has delivered three projects.

The Albums at the Center of the Case

According to Interscope’s complaint, Walker’s releases under the deal include her 2019 debut, Over It, which reached No. 2 on the Billboard 200. She followed it with Still Over It, a chart-topping album released in 2021, and Finally Over It, which reached No. 2 in 2025.

That leaves two projects remaining under the five-album commitment alleged by Interscope. The label’s lawsuit claims that Walker would owe $50 million if she terminates the agreement before completing those obligations.

The filing, obtained and first reported by Billboard, arrived near the end of a narrow legal window triggered by Walker’s termination notice.

Why California’s Seven-Year Rule Matters

Walker is relying on California’s “seven-year statute,” a state law dating to 1944 that allows individuals to leave personal-services contracts after seven years.

However, the statute was amended in 1987 to give record companies the ability to pursue damages when artists leave after seven years without completing their contractual album commitments. Labels have 45 days to file such a lawsuit after receiving a termination notice.

Interscope said that deadline made the legal action necessary even as discussions with Walker continued.

“While we remain hopeful that our ongoing discussions will lead to an amicable resolution, the statutory deadline makes it necessary to file suit in order to preserve the terms of our contract,” an Interscope spokesperson said Friday. “We have great respect for Summer and her music and would welcome the opportunity to continue our successful partnership.”

Walker’s representatives did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A Long-Running Music Industry Conflict

Walker’s case follows earlier disputes in which labels pursued damages after artists invoked the same seven-year provision. Warner Bros. Records used that legal route during a 2016 dispute with heavy metal band Avenged Sevenfold. MCA also brought such actions involving R&B groups New Edition and Bell Biv DeVoe in the 1990s.

The 1987 amendment has remained a point of contention in California. Multiple efforts to repeal the provision have failed in the state legislature.

Artist advocates argue that the threat of substantial damages can discourage performers from exercising their right to leave a personal-services contract after seven years. The record industry’s position is that the provision protects labels’ contractual rights and helps stabilize dealmaking.

ShowBiz Take

This is more than a disagreement over whether seven years have passed. Walker’s attempt to terminate the deal tests how that time limit operates when an artist allegedly still owes albums under a contract.

The three projects identified in the complaint all reached the top two of the Billboard 200, but their chart performance does not resolve the central legal issue: Interscope says the five-album commitment remains unfinished, while Walker has invoked a law permitting her to exit after seven years.

The $50 million allegation puts a major price tag on that conflict. At the same time, Interscope’s statement signals that the lawsuit was filed to preserve its contractual position before the 45-day deadline rather than to close the door on negotiations.

What Happens Next?

For now, the status of Walker’s deal remains disputed. Interscope says it hopes ongoing talks can produce an amicable resolution and that it would welcome continuing the partnership. Walker’s side has not yet publicly responded to the label’s complaint, leaving both the legal outcome and the future of the recording relationship unresolved.