A federal judge ruled the woman’s lawsuit was barred by a prior confidential settlement agreement reached with Universal Music Group
A federal judge has dismissed the sexual assault lawsuit filed by a former Def Jam assistant against the label’s ex-president, Kevin Liles.
In a new ruling issued Monday and obtained by Rolling Stone, the judge agreed with Liles that the Jane Doe plaintiff had reached a previously confidential settlement with Universal Music Group that barred her from bringing her claims against Liles as an individual. As Rolling Stone previously reported, the woman received $47,500 under the 2005 settlement with UMG after filing an initial complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights on June 29, 2004. In her 2004 complaint, the woman alleged she was fired from UMG in retaliation for her complaints of discrimination and harassment.
“Liles is expressly and unambiguously covered by the terms of the agreement, given that he is listed as a releasee in the preamble and included in the relevant definition of ‘Universal,’” U.S. District Court Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald wrote in her ruling. “The Agreement consistently and intentionally utilizes broad language discharging ‘any and all’ claims which ‘are known or reasonably should be known’ by plaintiff.”
A spokesman for Liles had no comment when reached by Rolling Stone on Tuesday. Lawyers for the Jane Doe plaintiff did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In her lawsuit filed earlier this year, the Jane Doe claimed Liles made “sexually inappropriate comments and advances,” and then raped her in a company office in 2002. “Kevin Liles proceeded to physically force himself on top of [Jane Doe] where he began to sexually assault and ultimately rape her despite her continued protests,” the 21-page lawsuit said.
Liles, 57, vehemently denied the claims, calling them “outrageous.” In a statement last February, he vowed to clear his name and sue the woman and her lawyers for defamation. In a letter to the court, his lawyers accused the woman of “hoping to extort a settlement out of Mr. Liles based on negative publicity.”
Jane Doe’s lawyers argued against the case dismissal, claiming Jane Doe had “a good faith belief that the scope of the release was not intended to cover the rape by Kevin Liles.” They said the woman considered the $47,500 a “severance package” for her employment claims.
