Life and Style
Tom Cruise is not a fan of Life &Style's latest cover story. Life and Style.

Tom Cruise is lashing out via his attorney, Bert Fields yet again. TMZ reports that Fields is outraged over Life & Style's latest cover story, which alleges that Cruise has neglected his 6-year-old daughter, Suri. The mag's headline reads, Abandoned By Her Dad. Fields is calling the report a disgusting and vicious lie. He cites Cruise's hectic filming schedule as the reason he has not recently been seen with Suri prior to Monday.

Until this week, Tom was shooting a film on location, but he spoke to Suri every day, Fields argues. He's with Suri right now; and he was with her the day before Life & Style trumpeted their cruelly false accusation. Tom dearly loves Suri, and the last thing he would ever do is abandoned her.

Just last week, Fields wrote an extensive letter to the National Enquirer threatening to take legal action if it does not retract its cover story, Inside Tom's House of Horrors.

Mr. Cruise is certainly not a 'monster,' wrote the prominent attorney. He is a caring father, a hardworking actor and, above all, an honest, decent man.

Since it was announced in late June that Katie Holmes filed for divorce from Cruise, Fields hasn't been shy about defending the star. He even seemed to criticize Holmes and her camp, portraying Cruise as the victim.

We are letting the other side play the media until they wear everyone out and then we'll have something to say, Fields told the BBC. It's not Tom's style to do this publicly. He is really sad about what's happening.

Fields has a long history of attacking unflattering reports about Cruise. Rather than ignore seemingly exaggerated tabloid fluff, the 81-year-old aggressively refutes rumors about his client.

In 2008, Fields threatened to sue biographer Andrew Morton for claims he made in his book Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography. The book alleges that Holmes' pregnancy was the result of being inseminated with the sperm of the late L. Ron Hubbard (Scientology's founder).

The man should be ashamed of himself and so should his publisher, Fields said. Clearly the book is actionable, but I'm not commenting on anything to do with legal issues.

Later that year, Dr. Drew Pinsky told Playboy that Cruise was drawn into a cultish kind of environment like Scientology,

To me, that's a function of a very deep emptiness and suggests serious neglect in childhood -- maybe some abuse, but mostly neglect, Pinsky said.

In response, Fields referred to the Celebrity Rehab host as an unqualified television performer

He seems to be spewing the absurdity that all Scientologists are mentally ill. The last time we heard garbage like this was from Joseph Goebbels.

Goebbels was the minister of propaganda for the Nazi regime in Germany and a blatant anti-Semite. The comparison was considerably extreme, especially since Pinsky is a real M.D. who is also Jewish.

In 2010, Fields threatened legal action against Amy Scobee, author of Scientology: Abuse At The Top. The former Scientologist penned the book in order to expose the Church's wrongdoings. Cruise factors heavily in the book as a high-ranking member of the controversial religion. Scobee disclosed details of the actor's supposed drug history and Scientology-related marital problems with Nicole Kidman.

Fields called the writer out in an accusatory letter.

Assuming that you publish these libelous assertions, I have urged Mr. Cruise not to give your book publicity by filing a lawsuit while it is initially on sale, but to wait until later to file an appropriate action for damages.

One of the most controversial Cruise/Fields collaborations occurred in 2001. Bold magazine editor Michael David Sapir offered $500,000 to anyone with footage proving Cruise's homosexuality. After informing the media that he had indeed found such evidence, Cruise and Fields apparently hired Hollywood investigator Anthony Pellicano to tail Sapir.

Fields responded by suing Sapir for $100 million but dropped the lawsuit after Sapir agreed to say that the tape didn't exist.

In 2009, the editor slapped the two with a lawsuit for $5 million, claiming that Pellicano, who was later arrested for spying on several high-profile individuals, wiretapped his phone. An unknown settlement was reached out of court.