A New York judge has denied motions filed by Disney, Miramax and CAA to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Julia Ormond related to an alleged 1995 sexual assault committed by Harvey Weinstein.
Negligence and breach of fiduciary duty are among the charges leveled against the three companies, which will now proceed to discovery and trial with a start date not yet scheduled.
“We are very pleased by the Court’s decision, which is a complete repudiation of CAA, Disney, and Miramax’s attempts to evade accountability for their failure to protect Julia Ormond from Harvey Weinstein,” said Ormond’s attorneys Meredith A. Firetog and Kevin Mintzer in a statement. “The case will now proceed to discovery, where, thanks to Ms. Ormond’s bravery, we will be able to expose the truth of how these powerful Hollywood companies enabled Harvey Weinstein.”
Ormond alleges that Weinstein, who is currently incarcerated in Riker’s Island, forced her to perform oral sex in 1995 and claims that CAA and Disney — the latter of which was the parent company of Weinstein’s Miramax at the time — did nothing to protect her.
Along with the battery charges filed against Weinstein, CAA has been sued on charges of negligence and breach of fiduciary duty while Disney and Miramax are charged with negligent supervision and retention. Ormond was represented by CAA’s Bryan Lourd and Kevin Huvane at the time, and claims that they moved her to a less experienced agent following the alleged assault.
“The complaint alleges that CAA advised this woman that it was pointless to do anything about the encounter, which advice is similar to that alleged to have been given plaintiff after she told them of Weinstein’s assault on her, i.e., that nothing should be done about it. CAA representatives are claimed to have advised her not to report the assault because she likely would not be believed, would not receive more than $100,000, and might be sued by Weinstein for libel,” New York State Judge Suzanne Adams wrote in her ruling.
“These allegations, taken together, suggest that CAA knew or had reason to know of a potential assault by Weinstein,” the ruling continued.
In a statement, CAA said that it “respectfully disagreed” with the ruling and maintains its belief that “there is no legal or factual basis for Ms. Ormond’s claims.”
“While we have deep compassion for Ms. Ormond and are incredibly disturbed by what she says she suffered at the hands of Weinstein, CAA did not learn of Weinstein’s sexually assaultive behavior until it became public knowledge decades later,” the statement read. “As a result, the claim that CAA should have warned Ms. Ormond about Weinstein’s criminal conduct in December 1995 defies logic.”
Weinstein currently faces a retrial for his third-degree rape and first-degree criminal sexual act convictions, which were overturned by a divided New York appeals court in April. That retrial is set to take place in November.
UPDATE: 8/19 5:30 PM PT — Updated with statement from CAA
Leave a Reply