A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed the remaining claims brought by a wardrobe stylist who said she was subjected to a hostile work environment while working on Lizzo's 2023 European tour. In a new ruling, a federal judge said Asha Daniels' case against Lizzo's touring company, Big Grrrl Big Touring Inc., could not proceed.

The judge previously dismissed Lizzo as a defendant in the case. A lawyer for the Grammy-winning singer called the ruling a  total victory for Lizzo  over a  ludicrous lawsuit. 

 There was never any basis for Ms. Daniels to sue Lizzo, her touring company, her tour manager, or her wardrobe manager. Indeed, the case against Lizzo was thrown out in December 2024. We are exploring all avenues to enforce our clients' rights after this major win,  the singer's lawyer, Melissa Y. Glass, said in a statement.

 We are disappointed by the court's ruling,  Daniels' lawyer Ron Zambrano said in a statement.  While we respect the court and the judicial process, we believe the decision improperly weighed evidence that should have been evaluated by a jury. 

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha said Daniels failed to identify conduct by the company's employees that demonstrated  general hostility  to women in the workplace or disparate treatment of men and women.  This alleged conduct and these alleged incidents, while inappropriate and unprofessional, fall within the scope of what the Supreme Court has held to be outside the protection of Title VII as part of the  ordinary tribulations of the workplace,'  the judge ruled.

Daniels first filed her lawsuit in Sept. 2023, alleging the atmosphere on Lizzo's tour subjected her to  racist and fat phobic comments,  sexual harassment, and disability discrimination. She claimed a wardrobe manager once physically injured her by rolling a  heavy clothing rack  over her foot and pushing her.

 The court does not seek to minimize or disregard the pain plaintiff felt from these injuries,  the judge wrote in his ruling.  Nevertheless, these injuries do not qualify as disabilities under the ADA,  he wrote, referring to the 

#rollingstone  #podcastdailynews