Attorneys representing three of four former Lizzo employees who accuse the singer of repeated sexual and racial harassment want a judge to allow them to take depositions of all those who have submitted declarations in a defense anti-SLAPP filing, including one of Lizzo herself.
Ex-Lizzo dancers Arianna Davis, Crystal Williams and Noelle Rodriguez sued Lizzo, whose real name is Melissa Jefferson, on Aug. 1 as well as the singer’s production company, Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc.; her wardrobe manager, Amanda Nomura; and her tour manager, Carlina Gugliotta.
In their Santa Monica Superior Court suit, the three former Lizzo dancers say they were weight-shamed and forced to endure illegal sexual, religious and racial harassment and disability discrimination.
On Friday, Lizzo’s attorneys filed an anti-SLAPP motion with Mark H. Epstein, maintaining that each of the plaintiffs’ nine asserted causes of action should be dismissed because they “arise from statements and other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of free speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest.”
Related Stories
Entrepreneur Alicia Etheredge-Brown Empowers Women to Use Their Voices
Flu Season is Approaching – What to Know
The state’s anti-SLAPP — Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation — law is intended to prevent people from using courts, and potential threats of a lawsuit, to intimidate those who are exercising their First Amendment rights.
In their anti-SLAPP motion, Lizzo’s legal team included sworn statements from 18 members of Lizzo’s touring party, who take issue with many of the lawsuits specific accusations, including allegations she had fat-shamed some of her dancers.
On Monday, the plaintiffs’ attorneys said in their new court papers in response to the anti-SLAPP motion that although typically an automatic hold is placed on discovery once such a motion is filed, the defense declarations give “a false perception of the reality plaintiffs suffered.”
The plaintiffs’ attorneys want to depose the declarants who maintain that their clients were not subjected to harassment and discrimination because there is a “strong implication that the declarations were signed in an attempt to keep the boss happy, implicitly intimidate the plaintiffs and create a skewed narrative by merely repeating it 20 times compared to the reality that plaintiffs lived and suffered through,” the plaintiffs’ lawyers maintain in their court papers.
Lizzo herself is one of the multiple defense declarants.
“I have never personally engaged in nor condoned others engaging in sexual harassment, religious harassment, racial discrimination or disability discrimination,” Lizzo says. “I have never fat-shamed or body-shamed anyone or allowed someone else to do so on my watch.
“That goes against everything I stand for, and I would never inflict on anyone else the kind of offensive and hurtful behavior that I had to endure.”
Another declarant, Ashley Williams, states she performed with Lizzo on “The Special Tour” and in other shows leading up to the road shows.
“Throughout the tour, I never experienced or saw anyone else experience weight-shaming or body-shaming,” Williams says. “Lizzo made it clear that she was not concerned about our weight, but she encouraged us to drink water and she emphasized that she worked out every morning. Her focus was on health and stamina rather than weight.”
A hearing on Lizzo’s anti-SLAAP motion is scheduled Nov. 22.
Clothing designer Asha Daniels separately sued the singer on Sept. 21, also naming as defendants Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc. Nomura and Gugliotta. Daniels designed the wardrobe for the dancers who would be on Lizzo’s 2023 tour. The plaintiff’s other causes of action include disability discrimination, illegal retaliatory termination and assault.
