Disney Could Lose Millions in Bombshell Harvey Weinstein Lawsuit

Actress Julia Ormond's sexual battery lawsuit against disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein could have far-reaching financial implications for The Walt Disney Company, experts have told Newsweek.

Earlier this month, Legends of the Fall star Ormond filed her suit in New York's Supreme Court, accusing the onetime producer of sexually assaulting her following a business dinner in 1995. According to Ormond, when they arrived at a New York apartment rented for her as part of a Miramax production deal, Weinstein stripped naked, lured her into massaging him, masturbated, and forced her to perform a sex act on him.

While the allegations are similar to other claims made against Weinstein in recent years, the lawsuit sits in unusual territory in that Ormond is also suing Creative Artists Agency (CAA), The Walt Disney Company and Miramax, the production and distribution company co-founded by Weinstein. Ormond has essentially accused the companies of not protecting her from Weinstein.

"CAA, Miramax, and Disney continued to handsomely profit from their close association with Harvey Weinstein for many years after Ormond was assaulted by him and then cast aside by Hollywood," Ormond's attorneys state in the lawsuit. "But the damage to Ormond—and so many other women Harvey Weinstein went on to rape, assault, and harass—has yet to be fully understood."

In a statement shared with Newsweek, Ormond said: "After living for decades with the painful memories of my experiences at the hands of Harvey Weinstein, I am humbled and grateful to all those who have risked speaking out. Their courage and the Adult Survivors Act has provided me a window of opportunity and way to shed light on how powerful people and institutions like my talent agents at CAA, Miramax and Disney enabled and provided cover for Weinstein to assault me and countless others.

"I seek a level of personal closure by holding them accountable to acknowledge their part and the depth of its harms and hope that all of our increased understanding will lead to further protections for all of us at work."

Responding to the accusations, Weinstein's attorney, Imran H. Ansari, told Newsweek that his client "categorically denies the allegations made against him by Julia Ormond and he is prepared to vehemently defend himself. This is yet another example of a complaint filed against Mr. Weinstein after the passing of decades, and he is confident that the evidence will not support Ms. Ormond's claims."

Calling Ormond's claims "completely without merit," a spokesperson for CAA told Variety that the talent agency "takes all allegations of sexual assault and abuse seriously" and conducted a review that "found nothing to support Ms. Ormond's claims against CAA."

Ormond's lawsuit states that her career "suffered dramatically" in the fallout from the alleged incident. CAA has claimed that Ormond's attorneys sent a "demand" that the agency "pay $15,000,000 in exchange for Ms. Ormond not making the allegations against CAA public. CAA immediately rejected this demand."

Newsweek has contacted representatives of The Walt Disney Company, Miramax and CAA via email for comment.

At the time of alleged incident, The Walt Disney Company co-owned Miramax. Ormond is suing both companies for negligent supervision and retention. Ormond is suing CAA for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty, claiming that after she shared her allegations with CAA in the 1990s, they warned her to remain silent for fear of sparking a libel lawsuit and then lost interest in representing her.

Millions of Dollars

As for how the lawsuit stands to affect Disney, Seattle attorney Kirk Davis told Newsweek that the entertainment behemoth could well stand to be paying out millions of dollars.

"If Ms. Ormand can prove that Disney was indeed in a supervisory relationship with the convicted rapist Weinstein, they could potentially be on the hook for millions of dollars in damages, to say nothing about the public image damage that could be done to the holder of the Micky Mouse brand," Davis said.

"The mental harm done to victims of sexual assault is tremendous because it is such a personal invasion and feels like an assault on a person's soul," he continued. "A common diagnosis for individuals who have experienced trauma like Ms. Ormond describes is post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

"PTSD can manifest itself in various ways. Like the soldier who has returned from combat but still experiences daily memories and heightened sense of alertness, many survivors of sexual assault experience similar feelings and memories. These invasive thoughts and feelings are sometimes impossible to dispel even with therapy. A compelling person like Ms. Ormond could receive millions from a jury."

Davis cited the Adult Survivors Act, which was enacted into law in November 2022, as setting a precedent for Ormond's potential pathway to victory.

The act, Davis explained, "allows adult survivors a one-year lookback window to sue their abusers no matter when the abuse occurred. The window [closes] on November 23, 2023, so Ms. Ormond had no choice but to file the action prior to the expiration of the statute.

"States around the country routinely allow adults to sue for abuse that occurred when they were under the age of 18, so this will be one of the first suits of its type in the country where an adult survivor of abuse is suing the perpetrator."

In February, Weinstein was sentenced to 16 years in prison by a Los Angeles judge for the 2013 rape of an actress. Last December, Weinstein was found guilty on three criminal charges, including rape, forced oral copulation and another sexual misconduct count involving the actress, who said Weinstein showed up to her hotel room in 2013 uninvited.

At the time of his sentencing in Los Angeles, Weinstein was already serving a 23-year prison sentence in New York for sexual assault.

Since 2017, more than 100 women have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct, often involving allegations of offering aspiring stars a boost to their careers in return for sexual favors. The first women stepped forward with the help of two journalists at The New York Times, who reported in October of that year on more than three decades of sexual assault allegations against Weinstein.

Critical Question

While Weinstein and his lawyers have remained adamant that the erstwhile powerhouse Hollywood producer is not guilty of the allegations, his convictions draw into question how he was perceived by Disney.

"The critical question from the perspective of Disney's litigation posture is whether they and their agents knew or should have known of Harvey Weinstein's conduct prior to the event with Julia Ormond," Chicago attorney Adam Zayed, of Zayed Law Offices, told Newsweek.

"What did Disney know about Harvey Weinstein when they purchased Miramax on June 30, 1993, and what did they know about Harvey Weinstein's behavior prior to the event?" Zayed added. "Weinstein's conduct would be considered an intentional act, and the law typically isolates corporations from intentional acts that were not within the scope of work or employment unless there was some act of corporate complicity, knowledge or ratification."

Douglas H. Wigdor and Effie Blassberger, attorneys for British-born Ormond, have shared in a statement to Newsweek that the Sabrina star is looking forward to her day in court.

"Our client has suffered tremendously both personally and professionally due to the assault by Harvey Weinstein, and the failure from Disney, Miramax and CAA to prevent it and to appropriately respond when she reported what happened," they said. "She feels completely betrayed by CAA for its knowing disregard for her safety and well-being, and looks forward to holding accountable the people and institutions that enabled Harvey Weinstein's horrific and predatory behavior."

Setting a Precedent

Los Angeles entertainment law attorney Tre Lovell told Newsweek that Ormond's case against Disney is one of the more straightforward factors in her lawsuit.

"The case against Disney certainly sets precedent," he noted. "In most cases, a parent company is not liable for the tortious conduct (or negligence) of its subsidiary.

"However, if Disney was significantly involved in the operations of Miramax to where it was jointly operating the company, as well as having control over employment and other functions, there's a good argument it may have had a duty to create a safe, harassment-free environment along with Miramax."

Conversely, Lovell added, the case against CAA "is much more difficult. As agents, it was CAA's job to procure work for Julia Ormond, get her deals on movies and television shows, and make sure she received her compensation, credit and other contract terms from movie-making.

"However, CAA did not necessarily have a duty to warrant or guarantee the conduct of others (i.e. Weinstein). Plus, Ms. Ormond dealt with Weinstein for over a year prior to the sexual assault without incident, suggesting he was not a threat. It would be a reach for the court to create a duty for agents to protect their actor clients from tortious actions by third parties."

It was announced in June 2022 that Weinstein will be charged in the U.K. with two further counts of indecent assault dating back to the 1990s.

The charges relate to an incident with a woman in London that allegedly took place in August 1996, said the U.K.'s Crown Prosecution Service.

Accusations of Weinstein's sexual abuse became a leading trigger of the #MeToo and Time's Up movements, which sought to end sexual harassment not only in Hollywood but by all people in positions of power.

Specialists from the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN) sexual assault hotline are available 24/7 via phone (1 (800) 656-4673) and online chat. Additional support from the group is also accessible via the mobile app.

Update 10/17/23, 12:02 p.m. ET: This article was updated with a statement from Julia Ormond.