Lizzo is vehemently denying the allegations made in the lawsuit filed by her former dancers and has requested the court to dismiss the case.
In a recent motion, Lizzo’s team referred to the claims of fat-shaming and harassment as a “fabricated sob story” aimed at seeking a quick monetary gain.
According to the motion, Lizzo’s team stated that the plaintiffs displayed a pattern of gross misconduct during their time working with the singer.
They allegedly missed flights, arrived late and intoxicated to rehearsals and performances, engaged in consensual relationships with male crew members, exhibited a decline in their professionalism and dancing abilities, and conspired to record and disseminate an unauthorized creative meeting with Lizzo and the dance cast.
The new motion seeks the dismissal of the lawsuit under the anti-SLAPP statute, which protects free speech by dismissing baseless lawsuits that threaten it.
The three plaintiffs, Crystal Williams, Arianna Davis, and Noelle Rodriguez, filed the lawsuit against Lizzo in August, accusing her of s**ual harassment and creating a hostile work environment from incidents that allegedly occurred between 2021 and 2023.
In response to Lizzo’s motion, the plaintiffs’ attorney, Neama Rahmani, criticized the singer’s defense, stating that “filming a reality TV show doesn’t give Lizzo the right to break the law.”
He argued that Lizzo and her team’s alleged illegal s**ual harassment and discrimination based on race, religion, and disability should not be protected under the guise of free speech.
Rahmani also highlighted that the defense’s declarants are either defendants themselves or individuals on Lizzo’s payroll, making their statements questionable and subject to jury evaluation.
Rahmani further emphasized that their clients have numerous independent witnesses who support their stories, and they continue to receive inquiries from other former Lizzo employees interested in joining as additional plaintiffs.
Lizzo’s motion includes 18 written declarations from her staff, including former dancers, band members, and tour managers, all of whom support the singer’s defense.
These declarations counter the allegations of fat-shaming and pressuring the dancers to attend explicit shows.
One declaration from bassist Zuri Appleby explains that the concern was not about weight gain but rather about the decline in performance quality, energy level, and overall health of one dancer.
Lizzo allegedly met with the dancer to offer support and tools for improving her health.
Another dancer stated that she never witnessed any weight or body shaming, and Lizzo was an inspiration for celebrating their bodies.
Melissa Locke, a dancer, revealed that she had spoken with two of the plaintiffs who expressed enthusiasm about their experience at the Amsterdam bar and did not mention feeling uncomfortable or pressured.
Lizzo’s attorney, Martin D. Singer, argued that the singer provided the dancers with a tremendous opportunity to advance their careers through participation in reality shows and tours.
Singer accused the plaintiffs of squandering this opportunity and filing the lawsuit out of spite, seeking attention and financial gain without taking responsibility for their own actions.
The declarations also defended Shirlene Quigley, the dance captain, who was accused of imposing her religion on others.
In late September, Lizzo previously requested the dismissal of the s**ual harassment lawsuit, denying all allegations.
If the case proceeds, Lizzo is prepared to go to trial by jury to contest the charges.
Furthermore, Lizzo’s legal team claimed that the three dancers suing her should not be entitled to damages due to their own failure to fulfill their contractual obligations, asserting that they are “guilty of unclean hands” in legal terms.
