A bankruptcy court judge is expected to rule June 4 on whether the settlement can proceed.
The road to appeasing the many alleged victims, creditors, board members and others with claims against the Weinstein Co. has been a tortuous one. A previous “victims fund” proposed in a lawsuit filed by former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman hit the rocks when the company declared bankruptcy and when Schneiderman himself faced sexual misconduct charges that saw him leave office.
In a tweet Friday that was appended with the #MeToo hashtag, Judd declared that her lawsuit against Weinstein is “ongoing” and that she “intends to take him to trial.” Judd’s allegations, however, are part of a separate case that is separate from the overall settlement talks.
Attorneys Douglas H. Wigdor and Kevin Mintzer issued a statement on behalf of their client Wedil David, asserting that there is no agreement by all parties to resolve the allegations of dozens of women.
“Contrary to false media reports, there is no deal to resolve all of the Harvey Weinstein rape and sexual assault cases. Our client has steadfastly rejected the proposed deal,” the attorneys said.
Their statement continued, “Sadly, rather than adequately compensate the rape and sexual assault victims of Harvey Weinstein who have pursued viable legal claims that have been brought within the statute of limitations, the proposed deal would provide millions of dollars to the ultra-wealthy directors of the Weinstein Company, such as James Dolan, and their big firm lawyers. It would also allow Harvey Weinstein and the men who enabled him, including his brother, Robert Weinstein, to escape liability and accountability without, apparently, contributing a dime of their own money. Our client does not begrudge any victim who accepts a settlement that she finds acceptable. But she will not participate in a process that is fundamentally flawed and unfair.”