Family Sues D4vd Over Teenager’s Death
The family of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez has filed a civil lawsuit against singer D4vd, whose legal name is David Anthony Burke, seeking damages over the teenager’s death. The lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court and accepted by the court, adding a significant civil-law dimension to an already high-profile criminal case against the singer. The family is seeking damages for Celeste’s death, alleged abuse and the emotional suffering experienced by her parents, as well as punitive damages. The complaint does not specify a dollar amount, leaving the eventual amount to be determined through the litigation.
The civil lawsuit comes as Burke faces a separate criminal prosecution arising from Celeste’s death. Prosecutors have charged him with first-degree murder, sexual abuse of a child and unlawful mutilation of human remains. Burke has pleaded not guilty and remains in custody without bail. A judge ruled in July that prosecutors had presented sufficient evidence for him to stand trial. His criminal trial has not yet begun.
The family’s civil complaint names not only Burke but also several people and businesses connected to him. According to ABC News, the defendants include members of his family and business circle, including his mother Colleen Burke, the head of the music-management enterprise that represented him, his day-to-day manager, a live-in security guard, and his recording, entertainment and music-publishing companies. The lawsuit alleges that these defendants were involved in or responsible for conduct surrounding Celeste’s alleged abuse and death.
Among the claims listed in the lawsuit are wrongful death, fatal stabbing, sexual battery, childhood assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress and human trafficking, among other allegations. These claims are civil allegations contained in the family’s complaint and have not been established by a court. The distinction is particularly important because Burke is also presumed innocent in the criminal case unless and until prosecutors prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
The lawsuit follows a criminal investigation that has already attracted substantial national attention. Celeste’s badly decomposed and dismembered remains were discovered in September 2025 inside the trunk of a Tesla registered to Burke at an impound lot in Hollywood. The Los Angeles County medical examiner subsequently identified the remains as those of Celeste.
According to prosecutors, Celeste and Burke began a sexual relationship in 2023, when Burke was 18 and Celeste was 13. Prosecutors allege that Celeste was last seen alive on April 23, 2025, when she traveled to Burke’s Hollywood Hills residence. They allege that Burke subsequently killed her and attempted to conceal her remains. Those allegations form a central part of the criminal prosecution, but they remain contested because Burke has pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution has presented evidence during preliminary proceedings that it says supports moving forward with a murder trial. In July, prosecutors called witnesses and presented evidence as they sought to establish probable cause. A judge ultimately ruled that the case could proceed to trial. Burke’s defense has disputed the prosecution’s account and maintained his innocence.
The civil lawsuit is legally distinct from the criminal case. A wrongful-death lawsuit is a civil proceeding, meaning its purpose is generally to seek financial compensation and other civil remedies rather than imprisonment. The family does not need to obtain a criminal conviction before pursuing a civil claim. The standards of proof and legal issues involved in the two proceedings are also different.
That distinction could become particularly important as both cases develop. The criminal case focuses on whether prosecutors can prove that Burke committed the charged offenses. The civil lawsuit, by contrast, can examine whether Burke or other defendants are legally responsible for Celeste’s death or the alleged harm suffered by her family. The family is also pursuing claims against people and companies who are not necessarily accused of committing the murder themselves.
The lawsuit therefore broadens the legal exposure surrounding the case. If successful, it could result in financial damages against one or more defendants. The family’s claims against Burke’s associates could also force the defendants to respond to allegations concerning what they knew, what they did or failed to do, and whether their conduct contributed to the alleged harm.
ABC News reports that attempts to reach the businesses and individuals named in the lawsuit were unsuccessful. An attorney representing David Burke and Colleen Burke did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The timing of the lawsuit is also significant. It was filed shortly after what would have been Celeste’s 16th birthday, and the family has publicly continued to seek justice for her. The family’s legal action represents another step in its effort to hold those it believes responsible accountable.
The family has separately expressed support for the possibility of the death penalty if Burke is convicted. However, that is a matter for prosecutors and the California justice system, and no final decision had been made on whether prosecutors would seek capital punishment. Burke’s current criminal charges include first-degree murder, which could carry the death penalty depending on the charges, special circumstances and prosecutorial decisions.
The civil case could also become important because of the number of defendants involved. Rather than focusing solely on Burke, the lawsuit alleges broader responsibility involving people in his personal and professional circle. This could result in litigation over whether other defendants knew about the alleged relationship with Celeste, whether they had legal duties toward her, and whether their conduct contributed to the circumstances surrounding her death.
At this stage, however, the lawsuit is an allegation, not a finding of liability. No court has determined that Burke or the other defendants are civilly liable for Celeste’s death. Likewise, Burke has not been convicted of the criminal charges against him.
The immediate legal development is therefore that Celeste’s family has opened a separate civil pathway for seeking accountability and compensation, while the criminal prosecution continues toward trial. The two cases could proceed simultaneously and potentially produce significant legal developments as evidence, witness testimony and the defendants’ responses are examined.
Key Legal Outcome
- Celeste Rivas Hernandez’s family has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against D4vd and multiple people and businesses connected to him.
- The civil complaint seeks damages and punitive damages, but does not specify a dollar amount; the amount would be determined through the litigation.
- Multiple civil claims are alleged, including wrongful death, sexual battery, childhood assault, false imprisonment, human trafficking and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
- The lawsuit is separate from the criminal murder prosecution. Burke has pleaded not guilty and remains legally presumed innocent unless convicted.
- The criminal case is moving toward trial, after a judge ruled that prosecutors had presented sufficient evidence to proceed.
Why It Matters
- Creates additional legal exposure: Burke now faces both criminal prosecution and a substantial civil lawsuit arising from the same underlying events.
- Expands the defendants: The family is also suing members of Burke’s family, managers, a security guard and companies connected to his career.
- Civil and criminal cases have different standards: The family does not need to secure a criminal conviction before pursuing civil liability.
- Could produce financial damages: A successful wrongful-death claim could result in compensation and potentially punitive damages.
- Adds scrutiny to the wider circle: The lawsuit raises questions about what people around Burke allegedly knew about his relationship with Celeste and whether they had any legal responsibility to act.
