Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Noble v. Weinstein

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York

August 13, 2018, Decided; August 14, 2018, Filed

17 Civ. 9260 (RWS)


 [*510]  Sweet., D.J.

Defendants Harvey Weinstein ("Harvey") and Robert Weinstein ("Robert"') have moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) to dismiss the Amended Complaint of plaintiff Kadian Noble ("Noble" or "Plaintiff") alleging violations of the Victims of Trafficking Victims Protection Act ("TVPA"), 18 U.S.C. § 1591 ("Section 1591"), under which a civil private right of action exists (18 U.S.C. § 1595 ("Section 1595")), to Harvey's alleged 2014 sexual assault of Plaintiff in Cannes, France.1

The alleged predatory sexual conduct of Harvey Weinstein has been the subject of extensive publicity, investigations, and litigation. [*511]  2 The instant Amended Complaint is the first instance seeking to apply the TVPA to an incident such as the one alleged by the Plantiff.

Based on the conclusions set forth below, Defendant Harvey Weinstein's motion is denied, and Defendant Robert Weinstein's motion is granted.

I. The Amended Complaint

The following allegations,3 which are assumed true for purposes of the instant motion, Koch v. Christie's Int'l PLC, 699 F.3d 141, 145 (2d Cir. 2012), detail the actions of Harvey Weinstein in Cannes, France in 2014, [**3]  which are alleged to violate Section 1591.

In February 2014, Harvey, a film-producer and co-founder of The Weinstein Company, LLC ("TWC" or "Weinstein Company"), approached Plaintiff, an aspiring actress, at a social function in London. Am. Compl. ¶ 15. After expressing professional interest in her as an actress, Harvey represented that he "wanted to learn more" about Noble. Id. Later that night, Harvey told Noble that he had a particular acting role in mind for her, insisting that "it will be good for [her]." Id. at 1 16. Harvey then introduced Noble to Charlotte, a TWC executive to whom Noble gave "detailed contact information." Id. Harvey repeated to Noble his assurance  [*512]  that the role he had in mind would "be good for [her]." Id.

Following their initial meeting in London, Harvey arranged an interview between Noble and Vanessa Ford ("Ford"), a Weinstein Company Executive Assistant. Id. at ¶ 20. At the interview, Noble spoke "at great length and detail" about her background, previous work experience, and aspirations. Id. Ford instructed Noble to write a "narrative" about herself, and to provide a film "reel," sampling her acting work, both of which she did. Am. Compl. ¶ 20. Ford assured Noble that [**4]  the reel and the narrative would be sent to Harvey, and that Noble "would be contacted." Id.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

335 F. Supp. 3d 504 *; 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137235 **; 2018 WL 3863452


Subsequent History: Related proceeding at Geiss v. Weinstein Co. Holdings LLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66364 (S.D.N.Y., Apr. 17, 2019)

Motion denied by Noble v. Weinstein, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130632 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 5, 2019)


sex act, film, allegations, promises, trafficking, entice, Compl, amended complaint, sex, venture, sexual, means of force, knowingly, hotel room, aiding and abetting, recruited, benefitted, modeling, actress, DICTIONARY, commerce, producer, reel, reckless disregard, bathroom, coercion, factual allegations, interstate, interview, aspiring