Wednesday, July 30, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 8 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Sex abuse lawsuit dropped against former TV executive

By Jennifer Sinco Kelleher

Associated Press

LAST UPDATED: 12:43 p.m. HST, Jun 05, 2014

A former aspiring actor and model withdrew his lawsuit alleging a former TV executive sexually abused him during trips to Hawaii in 1999.

Attorneys for Michael Egan III filed papers Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Honolulu voluntarily dismissing the case against David Neuman.

Neuman, "X-Men" director Bryan Singer, producer Gary Goddard and former television executive Garth Ancier were sued by Egan in April under a Hawaii law that suspended the statute of limitations in civil sex abuse cases.

The Associated Press does not typically identify alleged victims of sex abuse but is naming Egan because he has spoken publicly about his case.

He alleges Singer abused him several times during trips to Hawaii in 1999, when Egan was 17. Egan also accuses Singer of abusing him earlier in California as part of a Hollywood sex ring. The other lawsuits involve similar allegations.

All the defendants deny the claims. A judge next month will consider motions to dismiss the remaining cases.

The withdrawal of the lawsuit against Neuman "exposes this despicable lawsuit for what it really was: an unethical smearing and failed shakedown of a completely innocent man," Neuman's Los Angeles attorneys said in a statement.

Egan's Hawaii attorney, Mark Gallagher, referred questions to Egan's Florida attorney, Jeff Herman, who didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.

Lawyers for Neuman filed a motion last month to dismiss the case, arguing that Egan previously said in an under-oath statement in 2003 that Neuman was not in Hawaii with him and didn't sexually assault him or engage in any kind of sexual behavior with him.

"Now, more than 10 years after signing the declaration, plaintiff inexplicably has chosen to suddenly claim that Mr. Neuman had engaged in the very conduct which 10 years earlier he swore Mr. Neuman had no part of," the motion said.

The motion also argued that Egan is taking advantage of Hawaii's law that afforded a two-year window to file civil sex abuse lawsuits if the statute of limitations had lapsed. The window closed in April, but a bill before Gov. Neil Abercrombie would extend the filing deadline to 2016.

Federal courts can handle such cases when parties are from different states.

"Hawaii's extended state statute of limitations is being used ... to publicly defame and embarrass a California resident (Mr. Neuman), in the hope that Mr. Neuman, rather than fight these blatantly false and frivolous claims, will simply pay the plaintiff to go away," Neuman's motion said.

Neuman has worked for Disney and CNN as a TV executive.

 Print   Email   Comment | View 8 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
KaneoheSJ wrote:
The accused should be allowed to counter sue for defamation and the accuser should be investigated and brought to justice if found to be lying. He probably thought that he could scare the accused to settle out of court. Further, the accuser should be given a lie detector. I would bet that he would steer clear of a lie detector test, especially on a tv program that deals with such a subject. This man is a scoundrel. He makes light of those who were the real victim of sex abuse.
on June 5,2014 | 10:40AM
dyw001 wrote:
The accused can sue if he wants to, but I bet he won't because the accusation is true. Bryan Singer is known to throw sex parties with young men in Hollywood. He is not suing because he probably paid the accuser to drop the case. The accuser's main reason for the lawsuit is money, and once he got it, there went the lawsuit.
on June 5,2014 | 11:19AM
Poipounder808 wrote:
Wow, lots of assumptions on your part. Why don't you disclose your name so the accuser can sue you also for defamation?
on June 5,2014 | 12:57PM
dyw001 wrote:
I was not assuming. I said 'probably'. It's an opinion based on a lot of news item about B. Singer. Why don't you google his name and his sex parties? I am not categorically saying he paid the accuser off...it is my opinion that he did. The original poster called the accuser a scoundrel...now, that's an assumption. If Mr. Singer thinks he was defamed by the lawsuit, he could sue, but I doubt if he would. There is no law that prohibits him from doing so, but I bet he won't. My advice to you, is read up on Brian Singer's life in Hollywood. He is a big player in Hollywood, being the producer of all the X-Men movies.
on June 5,2014 | 01:34PM
dyw001 wrote:
Here's something for you to read: http://defamer.gawker.com/the-sad-truths-behind-the-l-a-party-scene-that-took-do-1567145397
on June 5,2014 | 01:38PM
dyw001 wrote:
All my statements about the accused and the accuser are just my opinions. I might be wrong, but that's what I believe in, in the same way that I believe that O J murdered Nicole, despite the not guilty verdict.
on June 5,2014 | 02:24PM
Anonymous wrote:
A counter suit only works if the accuser has any money, which I doubt he has.
on June 5,2014 | 01:12PM
Poipounder808 wrote:
Sorry, I meant the accused (Singer).
on June 5,2014 | 12:58PM
Breaking News