Andy Cohen scored a recent victory when an outside investigation found that Leah McSweeney’s claims against him were unsubstantiated. But that didn’t put the lawsuit to an end. Now, Bravo is opting for other strategies on top of the investigation.
For those out of the know, the former Real Housewives of New York star filed a suit against Bravo and Andy in February. She made claims of a toxic work environment, alleging that the company pressured stars to drink.
To that same effect, she claimed that Andy would pressure Housewives into doing cocaine with him. Allegedly, the Housewives who agreed received special treatment from the producer. Unsurprisingly, Andy and Bravo want this suit dismissed. But on what grounds?
Does Bravo have the right to get its stars drunk?
On May 24, PEOPLE published its findings from Andy’s filed court documents. Cohen’s petition to dismiss Leah’s lawsuit described her case as “threadbare.” He argued for the case’s dismissal “as a matter of law.” Not only that, but the motion argued the presence of a First Amendment violation.
Leah’s claims, Andy argued, “impermissibly seek to abridge Defendants’ First Amendment rights to tailor and adjust the messages they wish to convey in their creative works, including through cast selection and other creative decisions.”
But while featuring inebriated cast members is within the company’s rights, Bravo argued it’s never intended to use the Real Housewives franchise to do so. As for Leah’s claims of discrimination, the document argued that the statute of limitations was up, regardless of if they were true.
Leah’s lawyer then shared a statement with PEOPLE in response. “We do not agree that the motion has merit,” the statement read. “It mostly argues for dismissal on technical grounds essentially saying that Defendants were allowed to discriminate against Ms. McSweeney – not that they did not do it.”
“To agree with the Defendants would be to essentially say that the creative industries are not subject to anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws and that networks could engage in discrimination and retaliation with impunity, which is not the law.”
TELL US – WHAT DID YOU THINK OF THE MOTION? DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH LEAH’S ATTORNEY?
