Robson case dismissed for good, Judge’s ruling explained
In his civil case Robson has sued two of MJ’s companies – MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures. According to the law, a person can bring a childhood sexual abuse case against non perpetrator entities until their 26th birthday. However there is an exception. This exception allows lawsuit against third party entities (MJ Companies), if they knew or had a reason to know about the unlawful sexual conduct of their employee/ representative/ agent (MJ) and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it. A Supreme Court ruling also says that “the entity defendant must have some ability to control the sexual abuse perpetrator”.
Robson has been claiming this exception while Estate was arguing against it. After several rounds of revised complaints and demurrers, it was finally time for summary judgment.
On December 19th 2017, Judge Beckloff ruled in favor of MJ Estate and dismissed Robson’s lawsuit. Below you will find the ruling document and a discussion about what this means. Keep in mind that during both demurrer and summary judgment, the judge is required to treat Robson’s claims as true and only determine if there is a legal basis for the lawsuit. So the judge summarizing the allegations doesn’t mean they are actually true or the judge believes them.
Summary judgment ruling : https://www.scribd.com/document/367639167/Robson-Summary-Judgment-Ruling