Tierney Gearon
Julia Ormond, the English actress best known for her roles in ’90s films such as “Legends of the Fall,” “First Knight” and “Smilla’s Sense of Snow,” is suing Harvey Weinstein for sexual harassment.
Ormond is also suing CAA, The Walt Disney Company and Miramax. While Weinstein has been named as a defendant in numerous sexual assault lawsuits since 2017 revelations in The New York Times and New Yorker revealed his alleged pattern of misconduct with dozens of women in the entertainment industry, it is rare that business associates have benefited Weinstein’s work will be named as a defendant for allegedly enabling his behavior.
In a lawsuit filed Wednesday morning in New York Supreme Court and obtained by Variety, Ormond claims Weinstein sexually assaulted her after a business dinner in 1995 when he seduced her into getting a massage, climbed on top of her, masturbated and forced her to do so Give him oral sex.
After the alleged attack, Ormond informed her agents, Bryan Lourd and Kevin Huvane, about what had happened to Weinstein, the lawsuit says, saying CAA agents warned her not to speak out and failed to protect her would have. (Lourd and Huvane, now co-chairs of the CAA, are not named as defendants but are frequently mentioned in Ormond’s lawsuit as their representatives at the time.)
Ormond is suing CAA for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.
Miramax, the company Weinstein founded with his brother Bob, and The Walt Disney Company, which owned Miramax in the 1990s, are being sued for negligent oversight and retention. (The lawsuit cites numerous former Miramax and Disney executives, including Michael Eisner, Disney’s then-CEO, and Jeffrey Katzenberg, Disney’s chairman, although they are not defendants. The Disney executives named in the lawsuit are its works no longer in the company.)
“The men at CAA who represented Ormond knew about Weinstein. “So did Weinstein’s employers at Miramax and Disney,” the lawsuit says. “Outrageously, none of these prominent companies warned Ormond that Weinstein had a history of attacking women because he was too important, too powerful, and made them too much money.”
Weinstein, CAA, Disney and Miramax did not immediately respond to Variety’s request for comment.
In a phone interview, Ormond tells Variety that she is speaking out because she wants to be part of the change that can make Hollywood and other workplaces safer from sexual predators.
“I’m coming forward with my story publicly now because I feel like we still need systemic change, and I feel like we need the accountability of the trailblazers to get there,” Ormond tells Variety. “I feel like that’s exactly what happened to me.”
Ormond files her lawsuit under the Adult Survivors Act, which creates a look-back window outside the statute of limitations. The Adult Survivors Act was passed in the wake of the #MeToo movement, and Ormond says she is able to share her story thanks to the courage of other women and survivors. Ormond hopes that by sharing her story, she can influence corporate transparency around workplace reporting structures and the use of non-disclosure agreements to silence victims.
“Obviously Harvey Weinstein is in prison and will be in prison for a very long time. Personally, I don’t think Harvey could have done this without Enabler. And to me, that’s the level you need to get to when it comes to the cause,” says Ormond.
“If you think about it,” she continues, “if there had been best practices and if Harvey Weinstein had been called out at the outset after his first sexual harassment or sexual assault, he could have learned different behaviors, and possibly all of them.” No harm would have come to the people who followed. But he wasn’t. And there’s a reason for that.”
Ormond says that, aside from telling her agents in the ’90s, she kept her secret a secret until the #MeToo movement, which gave her the courage to speak to her family. Her support lifted a weight off her shoulders, but she still felt compelled to speak out publicly because she felt guilt and shame for the other women who were allegedly hurt by Weinstein.
Weinstein — who has been convicted of rape in two jurisdictions and is currently serving a 23-year sentence in New York, followed by a 16-year sentence in Los Angeles — has been accused by more than 100 women over the course of decades. Many of the allegations in Ormond’s lawsuit reflect a pattern of behavior also alleged by other women who have accused Weinstein. He maintains his innocence and is appealing both of his convictions.
“Part of my closure has to be talking about it publicly, and I think part of that has to do with the people who followed,” says Ormond. “Not only did I wrestle with what happened to me, but I really wrestled with the fact that other people were hurt. And they knew it.”
Ormond first met Weinstein in 1994 at a business meeting in London organized by her British agent and told her that an “important producer” wanted to meet with her about a film role. At this meeting, Weinstein and Ormond discussed the film business and several possible roles. “Weinstein behaved appropriately during the meeting and they agreed to remain in contact,” the lawsuit says. After that first meeting, Weinstein sent scripts to Ormond, they spoke on the phone, and Ormond gave her notes on the scripts.
The two developed a close but professional business relationship. When Ormond appeared on the cover of The New York Times Magazine in 1995, which touted her as the next biggest female movie star after Julia Roberts, Weinstein quoted the publication glowingly, raving about her talents, not just as an actress – but also also as a producer, saying that Ormond has “the best sense of story of any young actress in America today” and that “I once got 26 pages of notes from her on a script. “She can pick them apart and find the mistakes.”
In August 1995, her agents at CAA negotiated a two-year production deal with Weinstein’s company Miramax for Ormond and her production company, which was to be made as part of a company first-look deal. Through this deal, Ormond worked in Miramax’s New York offices and lived in an apartment paid for by Miramax.
“When Huvane and Lourd negotiated and secured the production contract for Ormond, they knew full well Weinstein’s propensity for sexually assaultive and exploitative behavior, particularly toward young actresses with whom Weinstein met for business purposes,” the lawsuit says. “According to information and belief, Huvane and Lourd were also aware of confidential agreements Weinstein had made to conceal his conduct from the public. But they did not disclose these circumstances to Ormond or otherwise warn her about Weinstein’s propensity for sexual assault.”
A 2017 New York Times investigative report called CAA part of “Weinstein’s accomplice machine.” At the time, the agency issued the following statement: “We apologize to anyone the agency has let down because they did not meet the high expectations we set for ourselves, as individuals and as a company.” We support without reservation, those who have spoken out publicly.”
When Ormond was allegedly assaulted by Weinstein in December 1995, her career was white hot. She has been the female lead in films such as “Legends of the Fall,” in which she starred alongside Anthony Hopkins and Brad Pitt, in “First Night” alongside Sean Connery and Richard Gere, and in a remake of “Sabrina” with Harrison Ford .On the evening of the alleged assault, Ormond was scheduled to have a business lunch with Weinstein to discuss a film she was producing at Miramax that Weinstein had been hesitant about, the complaint says.
“At dinner, Weinstein refused to discuss business matters and kept changing the subject. “Finally, after dinner, Weinstein said he would not discuss the project until the apartment that Miramax had provided to Ormond as part of their first-look deal with her,” the lawsuit states. “Her defenses weakened by several drinks, and wanting to get to what she believed to be the purpose of their meeting, Ormond agreed to let Weinstein come back to her apartment. Shortly thereafter, Weinstein stripped naked and forced her to perform oral sex on him.”
The lawsuit alleges that the incident could have been prevented if Ormond had been protected by Disney, Miramax and CAA.
“This sexual assault on Ormond could have been prevented if Miramax or Disney had properly supervised Weinstein and not restrained him even though they knew he posed a danger to the women he encountered at work. “Had CAA fulfilled its legal obligations to Ormond to look out for her well-being, not to put her in harm’s way, and to warn her about Weinstein’s predations, Ormond would not have been in the position of becoming a victim of Harvey Weinstein,” the suit says.
In the lawsuit, Ormond’s lawyers claim they took no steps to protect her when she disclosed the alleged assault to her agents at CAA.
“Not only did CAA fail to meet these fundamental obligations, it compounded the harm when Ormond told her CAA agents, Bryan Lourd and Kevin Huvane, what Weinstein had done to her,” the lawsuit says. “Instead of siding with Ormond and advocating for her interests, they suggested that she would not be believed if she reported Weinstein to the authorities and that he would seriously harm her career. Even worse, not long after Weinstein’s attack on Ormond and her reporting on the attack, CAA lost interest in representing her, and her career suffered dramatically.”
After the alleged attack, the lawsuit says Weinstein planned to visit Ormond in Copenhagen, where she would be filming the 1997 thriller “Smilla’s Sense of Snow,” even though Weinstein and Miramax had nothing to do with the film. Ormond was “horrified” and “called Lourd and Huvane — even though she had not yet told the backstory — to ask them to stop Weinstein from traveling to Copenhagen.” But they refused,” the lawsuit says, “ and suggested that if Ormond didn’t want him there, she would have to take care of him herself.” The lawsuit goes on to say that Ormond confronted Weinstein and told him that what he had done to her was “unacceptable.” and that she would not “tolerate” this behavior. She then called her agents and told them about the alleged sexual assault. The lawsuit says they expressed “no sympathy” or “surprise.”
“Huvane and Lourd then focused on the attack from Weinstein’s perspective, asking Ormond whether Weinstein might have believed that Ormond had consented, and suggesting that it was Weinstein’s perception of the event – rather than Ormond’s actual lack of consent – that was legally binding was significant,” the lawsuit says. “Lourd and Huvane also told Ormond that if she did something like go to the police, she might not be believed, and that she would risk further angering Weinstein, who might take even harsher action. They also told Ormond that she could get a lawyer and seek a settlement, but stressed that she should not expect to pay more than $100,000, which they said appears to be the usual penalty for sexual assault by Harvey Weinstein. Lourd and Huvane advised Ormond to consider whether such an agreement was worth it given the money she was making from films. Finally, they warned Ormond not to speak to others about Weinstein’s actions or he would sue them for defamation.”
Ormond claims she faced retaliation because she rejected Weinstein and tried to hold him accountable for what he did to her. Shortly after her call to CAA, Miramax terminated her contract.
“Ormond soon felt Weinstein’s wrath,” the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit states that Ormond “had a follow-up conversation with Lourd and Huvane in which she again discussed her concerns surrounding her sexual assault and the associated trauma, as well as her confusion over CAA’s unwillingness to address her.” “After that conversation, Ormond was transferred to a less experienced agent, the lawsuit says. She eventually left CAA.
Julia Ormond starred opposite Brad Pitt in “Legends of the Fall” in 1994.
In recent years, Ormond has appeared in television films and series, but she is no longer an A-lister. Her lawyers say that at the peak of her career she was earning $3.5 million per film. In 2010, she won an Emmy for her supporting role in the HBO series Temple Grandin. In 2013, she starred in the Lifetime series “Witches of East End,” and in 2020, she was a regular on a poorly reviewed spin-off of “The Walking Dead: World Beyond.”
“The damage to Ormond’s career from Weinstein’s attack and its aftermath has been catastrophic, both personally and professionally,” the lawsuit says, noting that she has “almost disappeared from the public eye.”
Ormond says friends have reached out to her over the years and journalists have often asked her, “What happened to you?”
“They kind of suspected that maybe something was happening,” Ormond says over the phone, sharing that she kept a diary about her alleged experiences.
“I don’t assume this happened because people wanted it. But it happened anyway. And it hasn’t been stopped,” says Ormond. “There should have been structures.”
She continues: “There is no way Harvey did this without people knowing. If people knew about it, they were either too afraid to come forward or they allowed the profit they were making from their relationship with him to justify a cover-up.”
In a statement to Variety, Ormond’s lawyers said she looks forward to her day in court.
“Our client suffered tremendously, both personally and professionally, as a result of the attack by Harvey Weinstein and the failure of Disney, Miramax and CAA to prevent it and respond appropriately when she reported the incident,” say Douglas H. Wigdor and Effie Blassberger . “She feels completely betrayed by the CAA for its deliberate disregard for her safety and well-being and looks forward to holding accountable the people and institutions that enabled Harvey Weinstein’s horrific and predatory behavior.”
In their lawsuit, Ormond’s lawyers say the impact of Weinstein’s alleged crimes remains unraveled years later.
“CAA, Miramax and Disney continued to benefit from their close association with Harvey Weinstein for many years after Ormond was attacked by him and then disowned by Hollywood,” the lawsuit says. “But the harm to Ormond – and so many other women that Harvey Weinstein raped, assaulted and harassed – has yet to be fully understood.”