NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) – A major film studio has requested a lawsuit against it related to sexual harassment in Hollywood be dismissed.
The Weinstein Co. (TWC), filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and strike the class allegations filed against it concerning alleged sexual harassment from disgraced movie executive Harvey Weinstein, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Feb. 20. Also named as defendants in the suit are Miramax Film Corp. and Miramax LLC.
Louisette Geiss and Sarah Ann Thomas were the two key plaintiffs in the lawsuit with claims all of the defendants violated Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) regulations.
Geiss alleged Weinstein assaulted her in his hotel room in 2008. Thomas alleged Weinsinten assaulted her in his home after she interviewed for a personal nanny position, also in 2008.
Plaintiffs in the case want to be approved for a class action that would include “all women who met with H. Weisintein in a meeting or event facilitated, hosted, or underwritten by TWC or Miramax, depending on the time period,” the motion states.
TWC outlined several reasons the court should dismiss the case in its motion and strike the allegations, ultimately stating it should not be held liable for Weinstein’s alleged personal actions.
It first stated plaintiffs have not pleaded a plausible RICO violation against TWC for their first count. It also pointed out the plaintiffs’ statements are not within the RICO statute of limitations as the time frame for an applicable RICO is four years. Both women’s alleged incidents occurred 10 years ago.
It also stated the plaintiffs have not pleaded the requisite predicate acts when it comes to its RICO violation claims, such as allegations that TWC tampered with witnesses, and that the company took part in sex trafficking as well as mail or wire fraud.
The defendant also pointed out the plaintiffs accuse the company of having a “pattern” of racketeering. It stated the claim itself isn’t enough to prove the company took part in the crime.
The defendant stated that a handful of the plaintiffs, not including Geiss and Thomas, “have failed to adequately allege viable facts of a RICO injury."
For the second count, conspiring to violate RICO, the defendant stated the plaintiffs did not plead a plausible claim when it comes to allegations that TWC had a conspiracy to violate RICO.
The defendant went on to state the claims against it should be dismissed as plaintiffs’ have stated the arguments are time-barred as the statute of limitations ended roughly six years ago. It also stated the claims of civil battery, assault, and negligent and intentional infliction of emotional stress should be dismissed. The defendant stated the two plaintiffs have not proven any liability on TWC’s part.
It also stated the negligent retention and supervision claims against TWC should be tossed out as the incidents did not occur on TWC property. The defendant wants the negligent infliction of emotional distress claims against it dismissed as it states the plaintiffs have not proven that TWC owed them any responsibilities.
Along with the dismissal of the claims, the defendant requested the entire class motion be removed as it said the plaintiffs have not provided sufficient evidence to prove their case as well as the notion that none of the plaintiffs have a cognizable benefit from whatever the outcome would be.