Tory Lanez’s $100 million lawsuit over his prison stabbing is facing a legal challenge from the warden he accuses of failing to protect him.
Thomas Valdez, warden of California Correctional Institution, has denied responsibility for the rapper’s injuries and disputed allegations that his rights were violated, according to court documents obtained by TMZ.
Valdez’s filing challenges Lanez’s claims that prison officials failed to take appropriate steps to protect him from violence inside the facility.
The warden acknowledged that Lanez was stabbed by another inmate, identified as Santino Casio, using a weapon made inside the prison. Both men were housed at the same facility when the attack occurred.
Lanez has argued that he and Casio should not have been placed in the same unit because of what he describes as Casio’s violent history.
The rapper filed suit against the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Valdez and approximately 50 correctional officers, seeking around $100 million in damages. The lawsuit alleges that prison staff failed to provide adequate protection and that officials were deliberately indifferent to the risk of violence.
Valdez, however, maintains that he is not legally responsible for the attack and denies that his actions violated Lanez’s rights. The filing represents the warden’s position in the ongoing legal dispute; it does not, by itself, resolve the allegations.
The attack took place in May 2025 and left Lanez with serious injuries. According to previous reporting, the rapper was stabbed 14 times and suffered two collapsed lungs before being taken to a hospital for treatment.
The incident drew widespread attention after footage of the attack circulated publicly. Lanez has since argued that prison officials were not present or responding as they should have been when the violence occurred.
The latest court filing brings the dispute over responsibility into sharper focus: Lanez alleges that prison officials failed to protect him, while Valdez denies that he bears legal responsibility for the injuries.
The case remains a legal dispute, and the claims made by either side should not be treated as established findings unless supported by a court ruling. The material provided does not establish whether the court has ruled on Valdez’s response or when the lawsuit will next be heard.
