Harvey Weinstein accuser in Santa Monica civil case placed on temporary hold

A civil case brought by an actress against Harvey Weinstein will be on temporary hold while the disgraced producer's criminal conviction for the same 2013 Beverly Hills attack against his accuser is on appeal, a judge ruled Thursday.

The plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe No. 1 in the Santa Monica Superior Court lawsuit filed in February 2023, alleges sexual battery, false imprisonment, negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress. 

According to the suit, Doe attended a film festival and alleges that Weinstein came to her hotel room unexpectedly after she attended events that day.

"After he was done raping her, he acted as if nothing out of the ordinary happened and left," the plaintiff's court papers allege.

Doe did not report the attack until 2017, when she had a talk with her daughter, during a time when Weinstein was at the forefront of the #metoo movement, according to her attorneys' court papers.

Judge Elaine W. Mandel said during a hearing Thursday that discovery will be stayed pending another proceeding on June 27.

"A stay would ... promote judicial efficiency by avoiding duplicative efforts for the parties and the court," Mandel wrote. "Furthermore, a stay would be in the public interest, noting that public interest favors a stay to prevent the subversion of a criminal proceeding."

The judge and the attorneys also discussed Thursday's overturning of Weinstein's unrelated criminal conviction in New York.

In their court papers, Doe's lawyers maintained that a stay would "avoid potentially inconsistent and confusing rulings, and it may eliminate the need to duplicate discovery and relitigate issues as well as streamline trial testimony regarding Weinstein's rape of plaintiff."

After Weinstein has exhausted his appellate rights and if his convictions are affirmed, Doe can use those appellate decisions to establish finality that the sexual assault occurred, rendering liability discovery for the rape moot, Doe's lawyers further contended.

But in their court papers, Weinstein's attorneys, who include Bill Cosby lawyer Jennifer Bonjean, said Doe's motion showed that the plaintiff has problematic issues with her case.

"Plaintiff brought this lawsuit and now refuses to prosecute it," Weinstein's lawyers maintained. "Plaintiff should voluntarily withdraw her lawsuit if she wishes to wait for the Court of Appeal to decide the criminal appeal, but either way, plaintiff will have to participate in discovery, including by ... sitting for a deposition. This is true irrespective of whether the Court of Appeal affirms (Weinstein's) conviction."

Thus, a motion to stay is "wholly unjustified," Weinstein's lawyers further maintained in their pleadings.

Doe is "wasting time and resources hoping she can get her pay day without the nuisance of doing real discovery that would reveal that her story of sexual assault is a lie," according to Weinstein's attorneys' court papers, which further stated that three jurors from the criminal case gave sworn affidavits stating they would not have convicted the producer if they knew even a portion of the evidence that was withheld from them.

In December 2022, Weinstein, now 72, was convicted in Los Angeles Superior Court of three of the seven criminal counts he was facing -- forcible rape, forcible oral copulation and sexual penetration by a foreign object -- all of which related to Doe. The attack occurred on or about Feb. 18, 2013, in a Beverly Hills hotel room.

Weinstein was sentenced to 16 years in prison in February 2023.

Weinstein's attorneys previously filed an answer to the plaintiff's civil complaint maintaining that Weinstein's accuser's claims are barred by the statute of limitations, that her request for punitive damages is unconstitutional and that her lawsuit should be dismissed.