【2002 Archives】

Source：Feast Information Network Editor：Science Time：2025-06-26 03:41:26

Ashley Judd002 Archivestaking Harvey Weinstein to court, and she intends for any judgments in her favor to benefit the Time's Up movement.

Judd filed her suit in the Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday, as she confirmed on Twitter. She's seeking damages for defamation, sexual harassment, and violations of California business laws governing unfair competition and intentionally interfering with a person's livelihood.

SEE ALSO: Here are all the women who have accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual abuse so far

The lawsuit stems from an incident that occurred in the late '90s, after Judd met with The Lord of the Ringsdirector Peter Jackson and his production partner Fran Walsh about a role in the then-in-development adaptation. Perhaps you remember this story; Jackson himself shared it late last year.

This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.

It's not Judd's meeting that's at issue here, but what happened after. As the filing states:

Mashable Trend Report Decode what’s viral, what’s next, and what it all means. Sign up for Mashable’s weekly Trend Report newsletter. By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Thanks for signing up!

Mr. Jackson and Ms. Walsh then told Weinstein’s company, Miramax, which owned the rights to The Lord of the Rings at the time, that they wanted to cast Ms. Judd in the films. But Weinstein torpedoed Ms. Judd’s incredible professional opportunity when he told Mr. Jackson and Ms. Walsh that the studio had had a "bad experience" with Ms. Judd, and that Ms. Judd was a “nightmare” to work with and should be avoided "at all costs."

The lawsuit contends that Weinstein essentially "blacklisted" Judd as an act of vengeance. "The pathetic reality ... was that Weinstein was retaliating against Ms. Judd for rejecting his sexual demands approximately one year earlier, when he cornered her in a hotel room under the guise of discussing business," the document reads.

In addition to costing her a role in what turned out to be a blockbuster hit for Jackson and company, Judd's complaint notes that Weinstein's alleged actions also "had a long-lasting ripple effect on the trajectory of her whole career.

The filing's "Summary of Action" concludes with the following statement, which provides insight into the reasoning behind Judd's lawsuit.

"No person—in whatever job, in whatever industry—should have to forfeit professional aspirations and the right to earn a living to the abusive whims of the powerful. Ms. Judd brings this complaint to vindicate that principle, and to right the wrongs that Weinstein committed against her, among so many others."

Reached for comment by Variety, Weinstein's spokesperson responded to the lawsuit with the following statement:

The most basic investigation of the facts will reveal that Mr. Weinstein neither defamed Ms. Judd nor ever interfered with Ms. Judd’s career, and instead not only championed her work but also repeatedly approved her casting for two of his movies over the next decade. The actual facts will show that Mr. Weinstein was widely known for having fought for Ms. Judd as his first choice for the lead role in Good Will Huntingand, in fact, arranged for Ms. Judd to fly to New York to be considered for the role. Thereafter, Ms. Judd was hired for not one, but two of Mr. Weinstein’s movies, Fridain 2002 and Crossing Overwith Harrison Ford in 2009. We look forward to a vigorous defense of these claims.

Featured Video For You

Previous：Ryzen 5 1600X vs. 1600: Which should you buy?

Next：A worthless juicer and a Gipper-branded server

【2002 Archives】

Related Articles

Related Recommendations

Categories

Latest Articles

Popular Articles

Hot Recommendations

Featured Column

Quick Links

Quick Links