The legal representatives of Jay-Z successfully obtained approval from Judge Analisa Torres to file a motion for dismissal in the Jane Doe lawsuit.

In court documents shared by legal reporter Meghann Cuniff on X, Thursday, Torres approved Carter's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's amended complaint.

"Carter's request to file a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's amended complaint is GRANTED."

Attorney Tony Buzbee, who is representing Jane Doe, submitted a response on December 31 in opposition to the request. Jay-Z's accuser is required to submit her opposition papers by the end of February.

This allows Beyoncé's husband and his team a window until mid-March to file a reply if deemed necessary.

Cuniff explained that when judges are deliberating dismissal motions, they are to consider the alleged facts as true. The focus of the arguments revolves around legal matters such as the statute of limitations.

Torres also mandated that lawyers must obtain court approval before submitting a motion.

In legal papers submitted on December 30 by Jay-Z's lawyers, headed by attorney Alex Spiro, it was mentioned that Jay-Z communicated with the Plaintiff on December 19, mentioning several concerns that they believed warranted the case's dismissal.

These concerns included technicalities, expired deadlines, and the jurisdictions in question.

In response to the allegations against Jay-Z, his legal team emphasized that the accuser did not fulfill the requirements outlined in the letter within the designated five-day period, which ended on December 27.

According to TMZ's review of legal documents, Buzbee overlooked crucial details that undermine the case, as stated by Spiro.

At a post-MTV Music Awards party in September 2000, allegations arose against Jay-Z and Sean "Diddy" Combs for assaulting Doe.

Spiro indicated plans to submit a motion for dismissal based on the timeline discrepancy. The victim's case is under the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which was passed in December 2000, three months after the alleged occurrence.

Jay-Z's attorneys stated in a December 30 filing that "The GMV Law was not enacted until December 19, 2000, three months after Doe's claims the conduct occurred, and cannot apply retroactively to create a cause of action unavailable to Plaintiff at the time in question."

They added that "a contrary conclusion would violate both state and federal due process protections."

In her legal filing, Doe detailed how she had been living in Rochester, New York in the year 2000 before movie to New York City. It was during this time that she befriended a limousine driver who escorted her to the party, a journey spanning approximately 20 minutes.

During the court proceedings, Spiro declared that the 20-minute duration of travel time effectively proves that the alleged incident could not have taken place in New York City, further discrediting the lawsuit. He also pointed out that the lawsuit was submitted after the statute of limitations had expired, with any legal allegations related to the purported assault exceeding the August 2021 deadline set by New York's Child Victims Act.

Originally published in Music Times

Tags
Rape Allegations, Jay-Z