Jeannie Mai Accuses Jeezy Of Owing Her More Than $92K In Rent & Failing To Pay His Portion Of Their Daughter’s Child Care Expenses

TV personality Jeannie Mai wants the court to hold her ex-husband Jeezy in contempt.

According to reports, the entertainer accused her former spouse of failing to meet a number of financial obligations he agreed to as part of their divorce settlement.

Jeannie Mai, 45, reportedly filed the motion against Jay Wayne ‘Jeezy‘ Jenkins, 46, alleging that the hip-hop veteran agreed to cover 4 months of rent, pay half the tuition for their daughter Monaco’s schooling, put $500,000 in an interest-bearing account for the child, and also transfer the title for two cars to her – a 2021 Range Rover and a 2022 Ford Bronco. However, according to Jeannie Mai, Jeezy has not upheld any parts of the arrangement.

Jeannie & daughter Monaco

Jeannie wrote that the “Put On” rapper owes her $4,000 for his part of tuition and other childcare costs, and also allegedly hasn’t given her access to the account he was supposed to create in Monaco’s name. Additionally, Jeannie accused Jeezy of withholding the titles of the two vehicles, preventing her from getting the cars from Atlanta to Los Angeles.

Jeezy

As you may recall, Jeezy filed to divorce Jeannie last September citing “irreconcilable differences” following 2 years of marriage. The former spouses finalized their divorce agreement on June 11th, though many details had been concealed up until now.

As far as the rent dispute goes, Jeannie said her ex was supposed to cover the months of May 2024 – August 2024, but she has racked up a bill of $92,417.39 since he has not been reimbursing her. Jeannie claimed she’s attempted to mediate the situation without the court’s involvement, but Jeezy’s legal team stopped responding to her requests back in July.

Jeezy, Jeannie Mai

Along with backpay and contempt, Jeannie is also looking to be compensated interest on the debt she’s owed. It has not been reported that Jeezy has responded to the matter in court, and a judge has yet to rule on the motion at this time.