Judge allows Ashley Judd to pursue Weinstein blacklisting suit
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that Ashley Judd may pursue her
allegations that Harvey Weinstein blackballed her after she declined his
sexual advances.
However, Judge Philip S. Gutierrez dismissed Judd’s sexual harassment
claim against the disgraced producer, finding that it would be
unprecedented to apply the statute to a prospective employer.
“We are very pleased that today the District Court held that Ashley Judd
can proceed with her lawsuit against Harvey Weinstein and continue her
effort to vindicate the wrongs he committed against her among so many
other women,” said Judd’s attorney, Theodore Boutrous. “The law should
not tolerate this abuse of power to damage another’s career.”
Boutrous said the case will now proceed to discovery, including taking Weinstein’s deposition.
Judd filed suit in April, alleging that Weinstein smeared her reputation
and dissuaded Peter Jackson from hiring her on “The Lord of the Rings.”
Judd was one of the first to speak out against Weinstein, telling the
New York Times that he invited her to a hotel room in late 1996 or early
1997, tried to massage her, and asked her to watch him take a shower.
She refused and walked out.
Judd says she was up for a part in “The Lord of the Rings” two years
later, but did not get it. After the Weinstein scandal broke last fall,
Jackson said in an interview that Miramax had discouraged him from
hiring Judd and actress Mira Sorvino, describing them as a “nightmare to
work with.” Judd argued that she only had a two-day part in the 1995
Miramax film “Smoke,” which was positive, and during which she had no
interaction with Weinstein, and that therefore Weinstein’s comments were
defamatory.
In a motion to dismiss, Weinstein’s lawyers argued that his alleged
conduct did not rise to the level of sexual harassment, and that the
entire suit should be thrown out due to the statute of limitations. They
also claim that Weinstein tried to cast Judd in other roles, proving he
did not intend to harm her career, and that Weinstein’s purported
statement that Judd was a “nightmare” was an opinion, and therefore not a
provable fact subject to a defamation claim.
In his ruling, Gutierrez held that Judd’s retaliation claims —
defamation, interference with economic advantage, and unfair business
practices — are sufficient to proceed.
“If Defendant indeed had no previous professional interactions — i.e. no
previous ‘experiences’ — with Plaintiff, his statement that he had ‘bad
experiences’ with her would be a provable fabrication,” the judge held.
Gutierrez also dismissed the statute of limitations objections, finding
it plausible that Judd did not know she had been blacklisted until the
Jackson interview was published.
But, Gutierrez ruled that Weinstein’s relationship to her as a
prospective employer on future projects is not covered by sexual
harassment law.
“The temporary nature of a prospective employment relationship is
qualitatively different than the often-more-permanent relationships
common with the categories of individuals explicitly listed in the
statute,” the judge wrote.
Gutierrez granted Judd’s attorneys the opportunity to amend the harassment claim. An amended complaint is due on Oct. 19.
https://www.geezgo.com/sps/39835
Join Geezgo for free. Use Geezgo's end-to-end encrypted Chat with your Closenets (friends, relatives, colleague etc) in personalized ways.>>
No comments