Case Intel

• Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt faces allegations of stalking, digital surveillance, and emotional abuse from ex-mistress Michelle Ritter in Los Angeles County Superior Court
• The 31-year-old Columbia Law graduate claims the 70-year-old billionaire worth $44.8 billion deployed his tech expertise to monitor her communications and lock her out of a $100 million AI startup
• After an initial December settlement, Ritter filed and later withdrew a domestic violence restraining order, with a court hearing scheduled for December 2024

LOS ANGELES, CA - When you're one of the world's richest tech moguls, breaking up apparently means never having to stop watching. At least that's what Michelle Ritter alleges in a jaw-dropping lawsuit against Eric Schmidt, the former Google CEO who helped build Silicon Valley's most powerful surveillance machine—and then allegedly turned it on his ex-girlfriend.

The 39-year age gap wasn't the only imbalance in this relationship. According to court filings, Schmidt used his vast resources and technical chops to create what Ritter describes as an "absolute digital surveillance system" that made private phone calls or emails impossible without his oversight.

"Please note Eric's technical background," the complaint reads. "I literally cannot have a private phone call or send a private email without surveillance."

The drama centers on more than just a messy breakup. Ritter, a Columbia Law School graduate who met Schmidt in 2020 while still a student, served as founder and CEO of Steel Perlot, an AI-focused venture into which Schmidt reportedly pumped $100 million. But when the relationship soured amid disputes over money and access to a lavish Bel Air mansion, Schmidt allegedly locked her out of the company's website entirely—despite her role as its chief executive.

The Settlement That Wasn't

The timeline reads like a thriller. In early December 2024, Ritter and Schmidt struck a "written settlement agreement" requiring "substantial payments" from the billionaire to his former paramour. The details remain under seal, according to a September 8 filing in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

But just one week later, on December 11, Ritter filed an explosive domestic violence restraining order against Schmidt. That TRO included allegations that the tech tycoon attempted to force her to sign "a gag order on any sexual assault or harassment allegations and sign a knowingly false declaration that any such allegations never happened."

Three weeks later, on January 6, 2025, Ritter withdrew the restraining order after the parties apparently reached yet another agreement.

Schmidt's attorneys haven’t taken this lying down. In an 82-page response filed October 8, 2024, his legal team called Ritter's claims "demonstrably false" and a "blatant abuse of the judicial system." Much of that response remains redacted.

The latest lawsuit pulls back the curtain on Schmidt's personal life, which reportedly includes an open marriage with his wife of 45 years, Wendy Schmidt. According to the New York Post, Schmidt's romantic portfolio has included "fashion designers, socialites, PR executives, and concert pianists." In 2019, he gifted then-girlfriend Alexandra Duisberg—32 years his junior—a massive 10-carat pink sapphire ring that sparked engagement rumors.

But the Ritter relationship appears to have ended far less amicably than his previous dalliances.

Schmidt's net worth is estimated at $44.8 billion by Bloomberg. Steel Perlot received a reported $100 million investment from Schmidt, according to sources close to the situation.

What's Next

The case could potentially involve:

• Discovery disputes over Schmidt's alleged surveillance systems
• Enforcement proceedings related to the December settlement agreement
• Possible mediation to avoid a public trial given the sealed nature of previous agreements

Given the sealed settlement and the pattern of agreements followed by new filings, further settlements remain possible before the next hearing.

🛑 It should be noted that the assertions in this lawsuit are merely allegations and have not been proven in a court of law.