A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed the remaining claims brought by a wardrobe stylist who said she was subjected to a hostile work environment while working on Lizzo’s 2023 European tour. In a new ruling, a federal judge said Asha Daniels’ case against Lizzo’s touring company, Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc., could not proceed.
The judge previously dismissed Lizzo as a defendant in the case. A lawyer for the Grammy-winning singer did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“We are disappointed by the court’s ruling. While we respect the court and the judicial process, we believe the decision improperly weighed evidence that should have been evaluated by a jury,” Daniels’ lawyer Ron Zambrano said in a statement.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha said Daniels failed to identify conduct by the company’s employees that demonstrated “general hostility” to women in the workplace or disparate treatment of men and women. “This alleged conduct and these alleged incidents, while inappropriate and unprofessional, fall within the scope of what the Supreme Court has held to be outside the protection of Title VII as part of the ‘ordinary tribulations of the workplace,’” the judge ruled.
Daniels first filed her lawsuit in Sept. 2023, alleging the atmosphere on Lizzo’s tour subjected her to “racist and fat phobic comments,” sexual harassment, and disability discrimination. She claimed a wardrobe manager once physically injured her by rolling a “heavy clothing rack” over her foot and pushing her.
“The court does not seek to minimize or disregard the pain plaintiff felt from these injuries,” the judge wrote in his ruling. “Nevertheless, these injuries do not qualify as disabilities under the ADA,” he wrote, referring to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
“In our view, the ruling appears to minimize evidence of a sexually charged work environment by assessing incidents too narrowly, [for example] pictures of penises and sexually charged comments by managers, rather than considering their cumulative impact,” Zambrano said in his statement. “We disagree that an employee twisting her ankle and limping while trying to work does not meet the legal standard of a disability under the ADA. These are important issues because these claims often depend on how a jury evaluates the full workplace environment, the surrounding context, and disputed facts. We respectfully disagree with the Court’s approach and are considering appropriate next steps.”
When the lawsuit was filed, Lizzo’s lawyers described Daniels as a “disgruntled” employee with “meritless and salacious” claims.
Daniels filed her suit against Lizzo in the wake of a similar sexual harassment and hostile workplace environment lawsuit filed by three of the musician’s former dancers. Lizzo has denied the claims. That case remains pending.
