A Nevada court in the United States dismissed a civil lawsuit involving the famous football player Cristiano Ronaldo. Court documents show that the allegations trace back more than ten years, with former model Kathryn Mayorga acting as the initial plaintiff in the case. The proceedings centered on claims that Ronaldo engaged in sexual misconduct with Mayorga in a Las Vegas hotel room.
The Nevada case was anchored in a broader legal narrative that began in 2009, when Mayorga first made her accusations. The matter eventually progressed to a civil lawsuit, which reflected a larger dispute about alleged coercion and consent. The court record from the city of Las Vegas notes that the judge overseeing the case, Daniel Albregts, received guidance suggesting that a portion of the action should be dismissed. The recommendation indicated a favorable outcome for Ronaldo and signaled the potential closure of the sanction aspect of the dispute.
In the months that followed, the parties reached a resolution in the civil matter that had already seen a financial settlement years earlier. It was publicly known that Ronaldo had compensated Mayorga in a settlement agreement following the earlier dispute with his former club Real Madrid. The settlement was described at the time as a payment exceeding half a million dollars, addressing the concerns raised in the case years prior to the current proceedings.
Despite that earlier settlement, Mayorga pursued new claims in 2018, seeking to void the original agreement on grounds that the document might have been signed under duress. This fresh path was accompanied by implications of improper pressure and a challenge to the legality of the contract. Ronaldo, through his legal team, firmly denied the claims and presented a defense in Las Vegas. The complainant then sought significant damages, proposing a figure of seventy-seven million dollars along with associated costs. The evolving dialogue in court reflected a continued attempt to redefine the terms and impact of the prior settlement during the latest phase of the litigation.
The latest procedural review culminated in a judicial recommendation to dismiss aspects of the case with prejudice, while also suggesting a broader dismissal as part of the resolution. The judge’s guidance pointed toward ending the dispute with a final disposition that would prevent future claims on the same factual basis. The narrative shows a long arc from initial allegations to a legally consequential settlement, followed by renewed challenges that sought to recalibrate or overturn what had been agreed years earlier.
From a broader perspective, the case illustrates how high-profile sports figures can become entwined in lingering civil disputes that extend beyond the playing field. It also highlights how settlements, duress arguments, and later negotiations can shape the trajectory of such lawsuits for more than a decade. In the end, the court’s decision to dismiss the case, along with corresponding recommendations from the presiding judge, marks a formal closure to this chapter while leaving a record of the contested events and the legal choices made by both sides over many years. The outcome underscores the gravity of civil litigation strategies in celebrity-related claims and the role of judicial oversight in resolving complex allegations with far-reaching implications for reputations and careers.