Court denies summons by publication for Virginia Fonseca in R$ 56 lawsuit.
The Amazonas State Court denied the request to summon Virginia Fonseca by publication in a lawsuit that names her as a defendant for alleged abusive advertising of betting. The decision, issued on Thursday (November 7th) by the 2nd Court of the Iranduba District, ordered the plaintiff to provide a new address for the influencer within 15 days.
The case was revealed by Metrópoles. The lawsuit was filed by Eliudson de Lima Silva against Virginia Fonseca, Adriane Galisteu, and the betting platform Betano. The plaintiff claims to have lost R$ 56, an amount he had set aside to buy his own home, after being influenced by the celebrities' advertising campaigns on the platform.
The impasse in the process arose after an attempt to serve Virginia with a summons by mail failed. The document was returned with the information that the influencer did not reside at the indicated address. Therefore, Eliudson requested that the summons be served by publication, a method provided for situations where the recipient cannot be located after all legal attempts have been exhausted.
Judge Saulo Góes Pinto rejected the request. In his decision, the magistrate highlighted that service by publication is only permitted when it has been proven that all possible measures to locate the person have been exhausted. According to him, there was only one attempt to locate Virginia, which would not be sufficient to authorize the measure. The judge also considered that, given the circumstances, it is not possible to affirm that the influencer is in an unknown or uncertain location.
Next steps in the process
If Eliudson is unable to obtain an updated address within 15 days, he may request background checks through systems linked to the Judiciary. The judge also left open the possibility of reassessing the request for service by publication, provided that the legal requirements are met.
The summons phase needs to be completed so that Virginia can be officially notified of the lawsuit and present her defense. Adriane Galisteu has already been summoned and filed a response in the case.
Virginia's defense position
Following the repercussions of the case, Virginia Fonseca's legal team issued a statement. In a note, they affirmed that "the influencer never maintained any commercial or advertising relationship with Betano, nor did she carry out joint advertising campaigns or actions with the other personalities mentioned in the lawsuit, and there is no basis to associate her with the circumstances mentioned." The press office added that "Virginia's addresses and those of her companies are widely known and easily identifiable" and that "the absence of a response in the lawsuit stems exclusively from the lack of summons, without any resistance on her part."
Origin of the action
The lawsuit was filed in June 2025. In the action, Eliudson recounts that, after losing R$ 56, he took out loans in an attempt to recover the amount, without success. He states that he was unemployed when he initiated the legal dispute and that he developed serious health problems as a result of the situation.
Regarding the influencers, the author argues that Virginia presented betting as an easy and safe way to obtain financial gains, constituting abusive and misleading advertising. Adriane Galisteu was included in the lawsuit for acting as an ambassador for Betano. The author also mentions Virginia's testimony before the Betting CPI (Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry). Betano, in turn, is accused of operating with mechanisms that would encourage successive user deposits through promises of profits.
