MrBeast Burger Lawsuit: VDC Countersuit and Rulings So Far

The MrBeast Burger lawsuit is a pair of dueling cases in New York between YouTuber Jimmy Donaldson’s company, Beast Investments, and Virtual Dining Concepts (VDC), the ghost kitchen operator that ran the delivery-only burger brand. Donaldson sued in 2023, saying VDC served “revolting” food under his name and used his likeness without permission; VDC countersued for more than $100 million, alleging Donaldson tanked the brand on social media after he couldn’t renegotiate a bigger ownership stake.¹² In January 2026, a New York judge ruled both sides can proceed to trial while urging them to settle.³

The Deal Behind the Fight

Beast Investments signed an Endorsement and Services Agreement with VDC on September 3, 2020, licensing Donaldson’s name and likeness to a delivery-only burger brand run out of existing restaurants’ kitchens.⁴ The model scaled fast, reaching more than 1,700 virtual locations by September 2022.⁵ Two contract terms matter for the litigation. First, any use of Donaldson’s name, image, and likeness required his prior written approval. Second, a Letter Agreement signed January 23, 2022, gave Beast Investments the right to terminate if the brand “materially and irreparably” tarnished MrBeast’s reputation. Whether that tarnish threshold was crossed sits at the center of the case.

What MrBeast Is Suing Over

Beast Investments filed suit on July 31, 2023, and the litigation now proceeds in New York State Supreme Court.¹ The complaint runs along four tracks.

Food quality is the headline. Donaldson alleges VDC prioritized rapid expansion over the product, ignored his complaints, and let customers blame him personally for late orders, missing items, unbranded packaging, and undercooked meat.⁶ The suit claims more than half of MrBeast Burger locations carried ratings below two stars.⁷

Then there’s the name and likeness. Donaldson says VDC posted his name, image, and brand on social media and elsewhere without the written approval his contract required.⁸ He also alleges VDC registered six international “MrBeast Burger” trademarks without his knowledge or consent, listing itself as sole owner, in the European Union, Canada, Thailand, Singapore, Mexico, and Malaysia.⁴

Finally, money. Beast Investments asserts it has “not been paid a dime” in royalties or distributions despite the brand pulling in millions.⁷ The remedies sought are termination of the agreements, an injunction against further use of his name and IP, and damages.⁹

What VDC Is Counter-Suing Over

VDC’s countersuit, filed in the New York State Supreme Court, seeks more than $100 million and tells a very different story.² The company alleges Donaldson repeatedly tried to renegotiate for a bigger ownership stake, and when VDC refused, deliberately undermined the brand.

The counterclaims include breach of contract for allegedly withholding the promotional support and social media activity VDC calls an “essential component” of the brand’s value.² VDC also says Donaldson changed the login credentials to the brand’s Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram accounts in April 2023, cutting off VDC’s promotional reach.¹⁰ A key episode: on June 16, 2023, Donaldson posted on X that the “problem with Beast Burger” was that he couldn’t guarantee the quality of orders when working with other restaurants, adding he was “way more passionate” about his snack brand, Feastables.¹ VDC characterizes posts like that as public disparagement that drove away customers, restaurant partners, and suppliers.

On the quality complaints, VDC pushed back, saying negative reviews were “similar in type and quantity to what one would expect on a routine basis with any restaurant” and asserting that nearly 70 percent of roughly two million orders on DoorDash and Uber Eats received five-star ratings.¹¹ VDC frames Donaldson’s quality concerns as a pretext for exiting a deal he simply wanted to renegotiate.¹⁰

Rulings So Far

The consolidated case sits before Justice Jennifer Schecter under Index No. 653908/23.¹² On May 30, 2024, Justice Schecter dismissed three of VDC’s counterclaims, and on May 20, 2025, the Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed.

The dismissed counterclaims were breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (duplicative of the surviving breach-of-contract claims); tortious interference with contract (VDC failed to show a breach by a third party, and Donaldson was not a “stranger” to the agreement); and tortious interference with prospective business advantage (VDC did not allege Donaldson committed a crime, an independent tort, or acted solely to cause harm, and the panel characterized his social media posts as “opinions”).¹² The ruling matters because it took Donaldson’s public criticism off the table as a basis for tort liability. VDC’s core breach-of-contract claims survived.

What Discovery Revealed

Depositions and internal messages produced in discovery added texture on both sides. Donaldson testified the venture made him feel “chronically depressed” and that he was “getting destroyed online” over the brand’s quality problems.¹³ Internal communications showed he had called the partnership a “fucked deal” and said he intended to “let it die.”

VDC’s own witnesses gave up ground too. CEO Stephanie Sollers acknowledged in testimony that roughly 5 percent of orders were incorrect at one point, above VDC’s internal 2 percent target.¹³¹⁴

Where the Case Stands

At a hearing on January 29, 2026, Justice Schecter ruled that both Donaldson’s claims and VDC’s surviving counterclaims can proceed to trial.³ She was pointedly skeptical of the damages theories on both sides. While Donaldson’s evidence of bad Yelp reviews looked “very compelling,” she said she was not convinced those reviews “would materially and irreparably harm the MrBeast brand under the circumstances.” She urged the parties to reach a “business solution” or negotiate a buyout rather than air “dirty laundry” at trial.¹⁵

VDC’s attorney, Shawn Rabin, told the court his client looked “forward to having our day in court.” Donaldson’s lawyer, Steven Marenberg, argued the quality failures had caused “systemic, deep” reputational harm.¹⁵ No settlement has been announced, and the case could go to trial later in 2026.¹³

The brand still operates without Donaldson’s involvement. Customers can order MrBeast Burger from hundreds of ghost kitchens globally, including locations in Singapore and Switzerland. Donaldson has said publicly that if he had the ability to shut it down, he “would have done so a long time ago.”¹³

1
NBC News. MrBeast Sues Virtual Dining Concepts
2
Nation’s Restaurant News. Virtual Dining Concepts Is Countersuing MrBeast for $100 Million
3
Business Insider. Judge Rules MrBeast Burger Lawsuits Can Proceed to Trial
4
Variety. Beast Investments v. VDC Complaint
5
Restaurant Business Online. MrBeast Burger Hints at More Physical Locations After Record-Breaking Debut
6
Food On Demand. MrBeast Sues VDC Citing Revolting Burgers
7
Restaurant Dive. MrBeast Sues Virtual Dining Concepts, Aims to Kill His Virtual Brand
8
Fox 35 Orlando. MrBeast Burger Lawsuit
9
CNN. MrBeast Burger Lawsuit
10
Restaurant Business Online. Virtual Dining Concepts Sues MrBeast, Claiming He Undermined MrBeast Burger
11
Restaurant Dive. Virtual Dining Concepts Sues MrBeast for Breach of Contract
12
Justia. Beast Invs., LLC v. Celebrity Virtual Dining, LLC
13
Business Insider. MrBeast Burger Venture Implosion
14
Restaurant Dive. Red Robin Stops Selling MrBeast Burger
15
Yahoo Entertainment. Judge Urges MrBeast to Avoid Trial