Ex-Howard Stern sidekick John Melendez – known as “Stuttering John” – has lost his appeal in his lawsuit against SiriusXM. Getty Images Howard Stern’s show moved from the radio to ...

Stern dubbed him Stuttering John, and he became known for asking impertinent questions to celebrities. The case is Melendez v. Sirius XM Radio Inc, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 21-1769.

John Melendez, who became known as Stuttering John as a longtime sidekick to radio and television host Howard Stern, has sued SiriusXM for using his name, likeness and voice without permission on c… ...

“Stuttering John” is Sirius about his lawsuit. John Melendez, the former longtime sidekick to radio shock jock Howard Stern, is suing SiriusXM. He claims the satellite broadcaster is mi… ...

'Stuttering John' from Howard Stern show loses lawsuit against Sirius XM. By Jonathan Stempel. June 24, 2021 10:08 PM UTC Updated June 30, 2021 Item 1 of 2 Radio & TV personality ...

When "Stuttering" John left the show in 2005, Stern held a contest to fill his role. The winner of the contest, Richard Christie, has been with the show ever since.

MANHATTAN — The Second Circuit affirmed that “Stuttering John” Melendez did not make a case under California law for violations of his “right of publicity” after Sirius XM Radio used portions of his ...

My condolences to Howard, @BethStern, Ray, & the entire Stern family. Ben was a damn nice guy, & I'm deeply sorry for your loss. #BenStern," John Melendez, who formerly appeared as "Stuttering ...

Longtime Howard Stern Show personality “Stuttering John” Melendez is suing SiriusXM Radio for using his archived hot-button interviews with the likes of the Dalai Lama, Ringo Starr and Mike ...

NEW YORK — John Melendez, a former Howard Stern sidekick known by his alter ego Stuttering John, on Tuesday lost his appeal in a lawsuit claiming that Sirius XM Holdings ...

Stern dubbed him Stuttering John, and he became known for asking impertinent questions to celebrities. The case is Melendez v. Sirius XM Radio Inc, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 21-1769.