Anthony Edwards has secured a decisive win in his long running legal dispute with Ayesha Howard, the mother of his 1 year old daughter, Aubri. A Georgia judge ruled that the Minnesota Timberwolves star will pay $3,222 per month in child support, closing out a case that had dragged on for months as both parties fought over which state should even hear it.
The ruling capped a jurisdictional standoff that began after Howard filed a child support case in California while Edwards pursued his own filing in Georgia. According to court documents, the judge noted that Howard did not appear for trial and offered no evidence to support her claims, a detail that played a significant role in how the case was ultimately decided.
A history of payments before the ruling
Court records show Edwards had already been making support payments well before the case reached trial, beginning in January 2025 with an initial payment of $20,000 followed by monthly payments of $5,000. By the time the judge issued the final order, Edwards had paid a total of $110,000 toward his daughter’s support, a detail that stood in contrast to Howard’s listed monthly income of zero.
Edwards signed a five year contract extension with the Timberwolves in 2023 worth more than $200 million, a figure that has remained part of the broader financial backdrop to the dispute even as the case centered mainly on jurisdiction rather than the specifics of his earnings.
The fight over where the case belonged
Howard’s push to litigate in California rested on claims that Edwards maintained significant business and financial ties to the state, including an LLC, registered trademarks, a bank account in Beverly Hills and past agency contracts with California based representatives. She argued in filings that Edwards had misrepresented those connections under oath in order to avoid California’s jurisdiction over the case, and she asked the court to reinstate an earlier support order in that state on those grounds.
Edwards and his legal team rejected that characterization, arguing instead that Howard was attempting to secure a larger support award by pursuing the case in California and describing her continued filings as an attempt to prolong the dispute unnecessarily. His attorneys also asked the court to limit further motions tied to the California proceedings.
A ruling that settles the bigger question
The Georgia court ultimately sided with Edwards on the jurisdictional question, formally establishing the child support obligation in the state he had argued was the correct venue from the outset. The decision effectively closes the long standing dispute over where the case should be heard, even as it caps a legal battle that traces back to before Aubri’s birth in October 2024.
The ruling marks a resolution to what had become an increasingly public fight, one that included repeated allegations from both sides and a drawn out disagreement over basic questions of process before the court weighed in on the substance of the support obligation itself.
