Smokey Robinson struck out Monday in his bid to ditch the sexual harassment and labor claims brought by two of the five Jane Does accusing him of on-the-job sexual assaults.
The Motown legend had urged a Los Angeles County judge to dismiss the claims as being too old to pursue because the women, identified as Jane Doe 2 and Jane Doe 5, stopped working for the Robinsons in 2020 and 2011, respectively. (The other three Jane Does stopped working for the couple in 2024, placing their labor claims within the statute of limitations for the blockbuster lawsuit they filed last May.)
Robinson, 86, had claimed the revival window cited to resurrect the women’s sexual battery claims did not extend to their separate allegations of a hostile work environment and unpaid wages. Robinson also argued the women failed to show how they were prevented from filing those labor claims within the three-year statute of limitations.
“There are no facts [in the complaint] indicating they were directly prevented from filing the employment claims specifically, which was their burden,” Robinson’s lawyer, Shir Davidovicz, argued at a hearing on Monday. “Even if they were granted leave to amend [the lawsuit], this would essentially be a fraud on the court given testimony that we’ve received in depositions. It would be further kicking the can down the road.”
“There was systematic sexual coercion, and that would have thwarted any reasonable investigation into wage rights,” the women’s lawyer, Herbert Hayden, argued. “The plaintiffs have clearly stated that there was a systematic coercion for them to live under a code of silence.”
Judge Kevin Brazile ultimately sided with the women. He said revisions to California law creating a recently extended lookback window for previously time-barred claims of sexual assault could apply to the women’s claims. He said it was simply too early to make that determination now.
“Plaintiffs correctly assert that [the new law] may revive these claims. This statute provides a revival window for sexual harassment and wrongful termination claims that arise out of the same underlying course of sexually abusive conduct as a predicate sexual assault offense,” the judge wrote in his ruling. He also noted the women’s claims of “a pervasive pattern of coercive sexual abuse” and wrote that, “given the allegations of systematic control and the unique power dynamic described between the parties, the court finds that the plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a basis for potentially overcoming the limitations bar.”
Christopher Frost, another lawyer for the Robinsons, said after the ruling that his side was not deterred. “The court simply indicated that it was overruling the demurrer at this time but is reserving judgment until there is further factual development, which is a different motion. We continue to vigorously defend Mr. and Mrs. Robinson against these malicious allegations and to pursue our own lawsuit against the plaintiffs,” he said in a statement to Rolling Stone.
In their $50 million lawsuit filed last May, the first four Jane Does alleged they were sexually assaulted or raped repeatedly while working for the Robinsons at their homes in the San Fernando Valley and Las Vegas. The first alleged incident took place in 2007. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Special Victims Bureau previously confirmed it was investigating the claims.
The Robinsons have denied the allegations and counter-sued the women for defamation and elder abuse.
Jane Doe 5 and a former car-detailing valet who alleged Robinson made unwanted sexual advances toward him sought to join the case in November. In a response, the Robinsons called the effort “a desperate last-ditch” attempt to press “salacious, outlandish claims for media attention” and force a payout. The two other accusers were added in an amended complaint filed Dec. 22.
Lawyers for the women did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the judge’s ruling Monday.
