Diddy Claims To Be Sufferer Of Cancel Tradition Frenzy- AllHipHop

Sean “Diddy” Combs’ high-powered legal professionals are taking one other shot at getting a decide to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a Jane Doe, who claimed she was gang raped by the mogul and his buddies.

Jane Doe made explosive allegations claiming a crack-smoking Harve Pierre pressured her to present him oral intercourse in a rest room in Detroit earlier than she boarded a personal jet certain for Diddy’s studio Daddy’s Home, the place she was raped once more by the Unhealthy Boy boss, Harve Pierre, and one other unidentified man. 

On February 20, the mogul filed court docket paperwork denying the claims whereas labeling the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Act unconstitutional, thus making the lawsuit a violation of his constitutional rights. 

In a supplemental memorandum of legislation filed on behalf of Sean Combs on February 23, Daddy’s Home Recordings, Inc., and Unhealthy Boy Leisure Holdings, Inc. as soon as once more argued for the dismissal of the civil motion introduced in opposition to them by Jane Doe. ​ 

Based on the memorandum, the lawsuit, which alleges a single explanation for motion underneath New York Metropolis’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence (VGM) Safety Regulation, has brought on irreparable hurt to the defendants’ reputations. ​ 

“The lawsuit…has resulted in them turning into victims of the ‘cancel tradition’ frenzy within the courts – effectively earlier than any proof has been offered, and on the idea of rank, uncorroborated allegations,” Diddy’s lawyer Jonathan Davis groused.

In his second try, Diddy needs to dismiss the case as a result of the plaintiff’s declare is time-barred because of a separate ruling by U.S. District Decide Lewis Kaplan, which was made in the future after Diddy’s preliminary response.

Diddy’s lawyer maintains that the claim-revival provision of the VGM is preempted by the adoption of the Youngster Victims Act (CVA) and the Grownup Survivors Act (ASA) by the New York State Legislature. 

These acts revived claims associated to sexual offenses dedicated in opposition to people underneath the age of 18 and people aged 18 or older, respectively. The lookback window for each items of laws has closed. 

Below Decide Kaplan’s reasoning, Jane Doe’s declare, introduced underneath the VGM’s claim-revival provision, is preempted by the CVA and ASA and due to this fact, have to be dismissed with prejudice.  

The defendants argue that the claim-revival provision of the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Safety Regulation can’t be relied upon by the plaintiff as a result of it’s inconsistent with the state statutes. ​

Diddy’s lawyer adamantly denies the allegations made by Jane Doe and argues that the declare is time-barred as a result of the alleged misconduct occurred in 2003 and the statute of limitations expired in 2010. ​

The defendants argue that this determination supplies one other foundation for dismissing the case and that the preemption floor utilized by Decide Kaplan is interrelated with their retroactivity argument and must be thought-about in deciding the movement to dismiss. ​

Diddy and his legal professionals need the court docket to grant an order dismissing the criticism with prejudice. ​