The court documents state that the 'RHONY' alum's claims about Andy intentionally preying on her alcohol problems to bolster ratings should be 'dismissed as a matter of law.'
- May 25, 2024
AceShowbiz - Andy Cohen has responded to Leah McSweeney's lawsuit against him, in which she accuses him of discrimination and substance abuse. Three months after Leah sued him, the Bravo executive producer filed to dismiss the suit.
Obtained by PEOPLE, the court documents stated that Leah's claims about Andy intentionally preying on her alcohol problems to bolster ratings should be "dismissed as a matter of law." The new filing also called "The Real Housewives of New York City" alum's allegation "threadbare."
The "Watch What Happens Live" host also alleged that the reality star's discrimination claims were "impermissibly seek to abridge Defendants' First Amendment rights to tailor and adjust the messages they wish to convey in their creative works, including through cast selection and other creative decisions."
" 'Whatever messages' Defendants 'communicate or intended to communicate' with their shows is protected by the First Amendment," the document continues. "Judicial intervention into casting decisions for expressive works impermissibly regulate[s] [Defendants'] right to alter the content of the story [they] tell -or choose not to tell."
In response to Leah's gender/sex-based harassment or discrimination, the document invoked Title VII and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), stating that the Bravolebrity's claims were "untimely" and had surpassed the statute of limitations. Andy's legal team argued that Leah's "only timely allegation of sex/gender discrimination," which involved Andy commenting "that [Plaintiff's] recent breast augmentation made her a real 'Housewife' " was "insufficient" to satisfy NYCHRL standards.
After Andy filed his complaint, Leah's attorney Sarah Matz issued a statement that read, "We do not agree that the motion has merit - it mostly argues for dismissal on technical grounds essentially saying that Defendants were allowed to discriminate against Ms. McSweeney - not that they did not do it."
The Adelman-Matz co-founder added, "To agree with the Defendants would be to essentially say that the creative industries are not subject to anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation laws and that networks could engage in discrimination and retaliation with impunity, which is not the law."
