Jonathan Cain Countersues Neal Schon Over Use Of Journey’s Corporate Amex

Last fall, Journey guitarist Neal Schon sued bandmate Jonathan Cain, accusing him of blocking access to “critical” financial records. Schon’s lawsuit accused Cain of refusing to give him access to records from an American Express account, through which “millions in Journey funds have flowed.” Now, Cain is countersuing Schon, accusing him of allegedly spending over $1 million on the band’s shared Amex, including $400,000 in a single month last year.

According to Billboard, Cain argued that Schon’s own “misuse” of the Amex led to the aforementioned restrictions. “Schon’s use of the [shared] Amex card for personal expenses created serious liquidity problems for the band, as the Amex balance had to be paid every month, and there were insufficient revenues to pay for other expenses as Schon saddled Journey with over $1 million of his personal expenses,” Cain’s lawyers wrote.

In response, Schon’s attorney Skip Miller called allegations “ridiculous” and “as phony as a three dollar bill.”

This is just the tip of the iceberg concerning Cain and Schon’s legal dealings with one another. Earlier this month, Schon sent a cease-and-desist letter to Cain’s wife, Paula White Cain, who serves as Donald Trump’s “spiritual advisor.” Schon accused White-Cain of allegedly giving herself access to the band’s bank accounts without his knowledge or consent.

Meanwhile, in December Schon hit Cain with a cease-and-desist Schon over a gig Cain performed at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago. Cain had performed Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believin’” at a Trump gala with a backing “chorus” including far-right conspiracy theorist and Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, right-wing personality Kimberly Guilfoyle, and former Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake.

“Mr. Cain has no right to use Journey for politics,” that letter said. “His politics should be his own personal business. He should not be capitalizing on Journey’s brand to promote his personal political or religious agenda to the detriment of the band,” calling it a “harmful use of the brand.”