The four previous employees who falsely accused the Motown tale of sexual assault and overtime earlier this month may be subject to more legitimate legal action against Smoke Robinson.
In a statement to The Times on Thursday, Robinson’s prosecutors ‘ lawyers John Harris and Herbert Hayden announced in a statement that their company would “file an anti-SLAPP action” to dismiss the musician’s$ 500 million lawsuit. California’s anti-SLAPP law protects against silly claims.
The partners of the Harris &, Hayden law company, who are the firm’s founding partners, claimed that the lawsuit is nothing more than an try to silence and terrify the survivors of Mr. Robinson’s sexual power and assault. It is a false and malicious legal maneuver intended to re-victimize, shift the blame, and deter others from speaking out.
On May 6, Robinson, who was sued by the original employees , filed a countercomplaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court. According to legal documents reviewed by The Times, the singer’s 85-year-old attorney and his wife Frances Robinson, who is a co-defendant, filed lawsuits against the four defendants and their authorized representatives for libel, false light, economic adult abuse, and invasion of privacy, among other matters.
The band’s legal filing allegedly includes allegedly text message exchanges and photos of his accusers that allegedly show a different side of the singer’s personality than the one depicted in their original lawsuit. The people, who withheld their personalities and worked for the well-known partners between October 2006 and April 2024, alleged in their$ 50 million petition that the song sexually assaulted them repeatedly and allegedly cheated them unfairly for the hours they put in. Additionally, they asserted that Frances Robinson had a negative opinion of them.
The former workers” stayed with the Robinsons year after year,” “vacated along” with the singer’s family, and were treated” as prolonged home” according to the lawsuit. The spouses, however, claimed in the complaint that the former people” sought to enrich themselves through the Robinsons ‘ wealth” and “harbored resentment” and” sought to enrich themselves through the Robinsons ‘ wealth.”
The lawsuit cites “allegations Defendants have lately fabricated in support of their excessive program” and statements the defendants ‘ attorneys allegedly made during a May 6 press event. According to legal documents, the singer claims that his opposition “participated in a conspiracy to unlawfully enrich themselves at the Robinsons ‘ expense.”
Harris and Hayden claimed that the countersuit “mischaracterizes the facts and seeks to punish his victims for speaking out .”
The attorneys continued,” Plaintiffs ] remain committed to seeking justice — not only for themselves but for all survivors who have been silenced by fear of retaliation,” they added. This case centers on accountability, transparency, and ensuring that no one is harmed or underpowered by power.
Robinson’s legal team also filed a motion to dismiss the accusers ‘ initial lawsuit, arguing that their choice to remain anonymous was in dispute. The motion contends that the plaintiffs ‘ concealment of their identities is prejudiced against the Robinsons ‘ defense.
The sexual assault lawsuit was described by Robinson’s attorney Christopher Frost earlier this month as an “ugly method of trying to get money from an 85-year-old American icon,” “dubbing the allegations” vile “and” false.
The singer has remained a tight-lipped about the case, which the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department uncovered for the most part.
He responded briefly to the Daily Mail earlier this month, saying,” I am horrified.”
___
© 2025 Los Angeles Times.
distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
