Kylie Jenner Required to Answer Questions Regarding Boyfriend Tyga's Financial Issues
Jenner's debt examination has been scheduled for Sept. 29 in Los Angeles
Kylie Jenner is now getting pulled into her boyfriend’s financial lawsuit.
The 19-year-old has been summoned to debtor’s examination under oath to answer questions regarding Tyga‘s expenses as part of celebrity jeweler Jason Arasheben’s lawsuit against Tyga. The rapper allegedly owes Arasheben an "excess of $270,000" in unpaid jewelry in a suit first filed in 2013.
Arasheben’s legal team filed court documents, obtained by PEOPLE, that state Tyga and Jenner must be available for examination prior to Oct. 6 or the judge will issue warrants for their arrest.
“We will ask him questions related to his finances, such as to his source of income to support his lifestyle as well as to pay for the extravagant gifts he buys Ms. Jenner. He will have to answer under oath and so will Ms Jenner,” Danny Abir of Abir, Cohen, Treyzon and Salo tells PEOPLE.
A debt examination is similar to a deposition but focuses specifically on a debtor’s finances. The Lip Kit entrepreneur will most likely be questioned on Tyga’s source of funds used for gifts he gave her.
Throughout their on-off again two-year romance, Kylie has received a $320,000 Ferrari for her 18th birthday, a $189,000 Maybach for her 19th birthday and recently a giant diamond promise ring from the “Rack City” hitmaker.
“Our client, Jason of Beverly Hills, has a judgment against [Tyga]. Until he pays off this judgment, unless he has other means of paying off this obligation and does, his sources of income used to buy these extravagant gifts or to support such a lifestyle should be used to satisfy his obligation. That potentially includes the gifts themselves,” Abir tells PEOPLE.
The Keeping Up with the Kardashians reality star is currently scheduled to be questioned on Sept. 29.
In August, Tyga finally settled his $480,000 lawsuit with his former landlord after a contentious legal battle over a Malibu home he rented in 2012. This occurred only after a judge issued an arrest warrant.