Grammy winner Lizzo’s production firm is still a defendant in a harassment lawsuit brought by a wardrobe stylist, but a federal judge has dismissed the singer from the case.
According to Rolling Stone, U.S. District Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha rejected the seven causes of action against Lizzo this week, ruling that plaintiff Asha Daniels lacked the legal standing to sue the artist on an individual basis because her employers were listed as her payroll and touring firms.
Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc., Lizzo’s production business, is still a defendant in the lawsuit.
On Saturday, calls to Lizzo’s lawyers and reps went unanswered.
Lizzo’s lawyer, Martin D. Singer, applauded the court decision earlier this week and threatened to sue Daniels.
He told Rolling Stone, “We are very happy that the court dismissed all of the claims against Lizzo and the overtime wages claim against all of our clients, including Big Grrrl Touring, in this baseless lawsuit.” We are considering bringing a malicious prosecution case against Asha Daniels and her lawyers since my client should never have been charged in this case.
Amanda Nomura, the wardrobe manager, was accused in the lawsuit, which was first reported by NBC News in September 2023, of making stereotypical remarks about Black women, calling the performers fat, useless, and stupid, and making them change in front of a mostly white, male stage crew who would obscenely stare at them.
The lawsuit claims that after Daniels complained about Nomura, he was fired.
I had the impression that I was in a madhouse. The day before she filed her lawsuit against Lizzo and other members of the singer’s team, Daniels, a 35-year-old fashion designer at the time, told NBC News. It was very startling.
But as NBC News previously reported, Lizzo’s team swiftly retaliated against Daniels’ legal team, claiming that they were attempting to taint an honor the performer was scheduled to receive for her charitable endeavors and dedication to social justice: the Black Music Action Coalition’s Quincy Jones Humanitarian Award. The singer’s team referred to the suit as a ridiculous and fraudulent promotional gimmick.
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!