A federal choose has dismissed a sexual assault lawsuit in opposition to the previous head of the Grammy Awards, after the plaintiff fell out together with her attorneys and stated in court docket papers that she feared for her security and well-being if her actual identify had been revealed through the case.
The swimsuit was dismissed on Friday “with out prejudice” by Decide Analisa Torres of Federal District Court docket in Manhattan, that means it might be refiled once more sooner or later.
The plaintiff filed her swimsuit anonymously in New York State Supreme Court docket in November, saying that Neil Portnow, the previous chief govt of the Recording Academy, had drugged and raped her in a New York lodge room in 2018. Mr. Portnow, who led the Grammy group from 2002 to 2019, denied the accusation, and in court docket papers his attorneys have stated his encounter with the girl was consensual.
The case was eliminated to federal court docket in January, and in April, Mr. Portnow’s attorneys stated they might file a movement to compel the girl — who’s described in court docket papers solely as a musician from outdoors the US — to make use of her actual identify.
In response, the girl filed an uncommon direct enchantment to the choose, asking to have her case dismissed, and saying that she feared “potential grave hurt” if her identify grew to become recognized. Her attorneys then requested permission to withdraw as her counsel, saying that “the attorney-client relationship has deteriorated past restore.”
In her letter to the choose, the girl stated that her lead legal professional, Jeffrey R. Anderson, had really resigned days earlier and informed her in a letter: “Now that the defendants introduced your case into the federal court docket the place your anonymity and your identify can now not be protected, you’re confronted and we’re confronted with the potential for grave additional hurt.”
Legal professionals for Mr. Portnow wrote to the choose saying that any dismissal of the case ought to be “with prejudice,” which might forestall her from bringing it once more.
The girl, they wrote, had engaged in “vexatious and harassing habits that has prompted substantial hurt” to Mr. Portnow. Their response included what they stated had been excerpts from textual content messages and emails; they stated the girl had proposed marriage to Mr. Portnow and requested him to put in writing a letter of advice for an immigration utility.
In rejecting Mr. Portnow’s request, Decide Torres stated that Mr. Portnow wouldn’t undergo “plain authorized prejudice” if one other case had been introduced. The choose additionally famous the textual content messages and emails he cited, saying: “Portnow’s one-sided characterization of the occasions at subject precedes discovery, and Portnow has not provided proof that the litigation itself was filed with an ‘sick motive.’”
