Settlement of Jimmie Allen Sexual Assault Lawsuit Settles Nothing

On March 15th, it was reported widely that Jimmie Allen’s former manager had decided to drop the sexual assault lawsuit she took out against the mainstream country singer in May of 2023. That characterization by multiple headlines and articles only tells part of the story. Yes, the particular part of the lawsuit dealing with the former manager and her accusations has been settled. But it was only after Allen potentially agreed to financially compensate the accuser, and agreed to drop his countersuit against her.
Furthermore, the lawsuit is still moving forward, with claims against the accuser’s former management company, Wide Open Music, still pending. Jimmie Allen also has another lawsuit with further accusations from a second accuser still pending as well.
But even if the other portions of the first lawsuit get settled, and so does the second lawsuit in full, this doesn’t settle anything, either for Jimmie Allen, the accusers, the public, or the country music industry. It will still leave open questions about what actually happened, and potentially, an issue that the country music industry still needs to reckon with.
Too often in these sexual assault cases, powerful men with deep pockets can make these issues go away with settlement payments or hush money to avoid public scrutiny. This is one of the many reasons these sexual assault concerns continue to persist in entertainment.
Though it’s perfectly understandable that some victims or alleged victims don’t want to drag out the process—and you certainly don’t want to victim shame the accusers—these lawsuit settlements allow the specter of exhortation or plausible deniability to be pushed by the potential abusers, just like Jimmie Allen has done in this instance.
For example, Billboard’s reporting on the matter was titled, “Jimmie Allen Sexual Assault Accuser Agrees to Drop Lawsuit Against Country Star,” and reads at the start, “Jimmie Allen‘s former manager has agreed to dismiss her lawsuit claiming the country singer sexually assaulted her, ending the case less than a year after it was filed. In court papers filed Thursday (Mar. 14), attorneys for Allen and his unnamed Jane Doe accuser — his former day-to-day manager — jointly asked a federal judge to dismiss her claims against the country singer.”
The article continues on to talk about how parts of the lawsuit are still pending against the management company, but the characterization is that the accusers case was closed with no resolution in their favor.
Jimmie Allen said in a statement, “Because of these false allegations, the past eight months have been the hardest of my life, but it has shown me how much love I have from my friends and family. [Jane Doe’s] non-[factual] story has story has affected the lives of my children and I’m not down with that.”
But as the accuser’s attorney Elizabeth Fegan clarified on Monday, “Jane Doe entered into a settlement agreement with Jimmie Allen to avoid the trauma of reliving her abuse over the course of a painful trial. [We] agreed to in order to save my client from the emotional trauma of reliving her experience.”
Fegan continues, “The lawsuit against Allen was never about financial gain for my client, but instead holding Allen accountable. Unfortunately, civil litigation has few ways to punish wrongdoers; we could not ask the court to jail him, for example, or force him to change his behavior. One of the few remedies we do have in civil litigation is to ask the court to punish through monetary damages, which we did. While Allen and my client reached an agreement prior to trial, the motivations remained true — to hold Allen accountable, which we succeeded in doing.”
Attorney Elizabeth Fagan goes on to say further, “Both parties agreed to confidentiality about the case,” which Allen “reportedly violated” by “implying Jane Doe recanted her allegations and walked away from the litigation. Those reported assertions by Allen are absolutely false — my client stands by her statements in the complaint, that Allen raped her while she was incapacitated and sexually abused her while she was his day-to-day manager.”
Even with the settlement of portions of the first lawsuit against Jimmie Allen, does this in an way truly exonerate Allen in the public eye? Do we expect country radio to start playing his singles with the same enthusiasm they supported him with previously? Do we expect country festivals to put him on their rosters? That seems unlikely.
There is still an unresolved feeling swirling around this situation because all the accusations were laid out in such detail when the lawsuit was first announced, and because those accusations were so disturbing. Now that both parties have signed legally binding confidentiality clauses, it virtually guarantees we will never know the true story.
The only way for Jimmie Allen to to truly exonerate himself would either be a trial, or a true dropping of the accusations against him without an exchange of money or terms, either by the accuser herself, or a judge throwing the lawsuit out. If Allen is indeed innocent and is the true victim in this instance, this lawsuit settlement doesn’t serve his purposes either.
When it comes to the Jimmie Allen sexual assault situation, we are still left with a he said/she said at best, while other matters stemming from the accusations are still pending in litigation. Meanwhile, as one of country music’s most prominent modern Black stars, Allen’s virtual cancellation due to the sexual accusations is allowing some to claim country is less inviting to Black performers than it actually is in light of Beyoncé’s country project.
Jimmie Allen says that he will further address the settlement of the lawsuit and other issues more in-depth soon.
– – – – – – – –
The Backstory:
On May 11th, 2023, Jimmie Allen’s former day-to-day manger filed suit in Tennessee and accused the singer of scores of incidents where she was allegedly raped and sexually assaulted over multiple months, including during trips to prominent television appearances and other events. This included one incident where she woke up naked in a hotel room in severe pain, bleeding vaginally, and not being able to recall anything from the previous evening. Jimmie Allen was beside her in bed, and insisting she take a morning after pill. The victim says this is how she lost her virginity.
Further incidents were also chronicled in a detailed article in Variety, including an incident where the alleged victim sought medical treatment at a hospital, and says Jimmie Allen took video and nude photos of her to coerce her silence, and to use as blackmail against her. For Jimmie Allen’s part, he acknowledged a sexual relationship with the victim, but claims it was consensual. Allen was married at the time, but announced his separation from his wife shortly before the allegations came to light.
Then on June 9th, 2023, a second lawsuit was brought against Allen by another alleged victim claiming battery, assault, and invasion of privacy. The second victim claimed that she met Jimmie Allen on a flight. Afterwards, Allen’s bodyguard followed her into the airport and told her that Allen wanted her phone number, which she provided. After months of calls and text messages, they agreed to meet in Las Vegas at the Cosmopolitan Hotel in July of 2022. She voluntarily met Allen in the bedroom, but allegedly told him she was not on birth control and repeatedly said she did not want him to ejaculate inside of her.
According to the alleged victim, Jimmie Allen said he wanted to get her pregnant, and ultimately did ejaculate inside of her despite her requests. Distressed by the incident, the alleged victim became desperate to get a separate hotel room and to find a morning after pill. As she was gathering her belongings to leave the room, she discovered a cell phone set up in a closet focused on the bed and recording their interaction. While Jimmie Allen was passed out, Jane Doe 2 took the phone with her, booked a new flight to her home in Sacramento, California, and gave the phone over to the local police when she arrived.
March 19, 2024 @ 10:36 am
I doubt Allen will have anything of substance to say about the settlement. Money tends to make accusations like this go away, unfortunately. But on the other hand, there are women who will make such accusations with an eye on a payday, as much as those who see every issue in binary yes/no terms would have us believe.
I wonder if Allen’s old label will take him back. A similar situation is unfolding right now in baseball, where pitcher Trevor Bauer’s accuser (rough sex, in the context of a relationship) is no longer pursuing charges. Even so, no team seems willing to risk the social media outrage signing him would incur. And in Allen’s case, even with mainstream country’s female lean and the industry belief that women only want to listen to men sing, would those women who go ga-ga over the ultra-monogamous Kane Brown and Thomas Rhett be willing to listen to Jimmie Allen again?
March 19, 2024 @ 10:45 am
I don’t think this settlement in any way materially helps the career prospects of Jimmie Allen. If the accuser is truly lying, the damage has been done. If this is the case, you don’t drop your countersuit. You continue to plead your innocence, and insist on your day in court to truly clear your name. That is the only way to resolve it. In this environment, Jimmie Allen will never be signed to major label. That doesn’t mean he can’t perform, tour, and release music, and he should be able to. He hasn’t been convicted of anything, and has a right to support himself and his family. But I just don’t see him making a comeback as a popular country music entertainer, and it’s not like he every had grassroots to fall back on.
March 19, 2024 @ 10:47 am
I still can’t believe they had this hack duet with Pride on an awards show. An insult to a country music legend.
March 19, 2024 @ 12:14 pm
“If this is the case, you don’t drop your countersuit. You continue to plead your innocence, and insist on your day in court to truly clear your name.”
No, that’s not how it works.
In this country, it’s not on us to prove our “plead” our innocence. We’re PRESUMED innocent–unless we’re PROVED guilty in court. (I won’t even get into the fact that that’s in a criminal trial–not a lawsuit.)
Aside from that, you’re suggesting that it could somehow benefit Allen to drag this thing out and provide a blow-by-blow account to the public of his seduction and sexual encounter with this woman.
Most likely, the facts have elements that would put BOTH of them in a bad light. A rich, famous celebirity proving that he got some woman to consent to degrading sex with him because she was star-struck or believed it would help her get ahead as a publicist would hardly “clear his name.”
Any lawyer would tell him that the smart thing is to settle this case and stop the bleeding and move on with his career.
March 19, 2024 @ 12:26 pm
First off, this was a civil case, not a criminal one. So the “innocent until proven guilty” doesn’t exactly apply.
That said, I agree that Allen should be presumed innocent until proof is forwarded that he’s guilty. But that’s not how the world works. He’s already suffered irreparable damage from these accusations. I just don’t see a mechanism where he would be completely exonerated unless a trial was held, and a judge or jury found the accusers accusations were without merit.
March 19, 2024 @ 12:44 pm
Sorry if I missed this along the way, but why isn’t there a criminal case? And what might that say?
March 19, 2024 @ 3:29 pm
I don’t know the status of any criminal proceedings in this case. I do know there was an investigation in California in the matter involving the 2nd individual that I believe is ongoing. In the first case, if the individual does not want to go through the grief of moving forward with a civil case, my guess is she’s not going to be open with moving forward with a criminal case either. This doesn’t mean crimes were not committed. But we have to assume Jimmie Allen is innocent of any criminal wrongdoing until he is found guilty in a court of law.
March 19, 2024 @ 8:37 pm
“Fegan continues, “The lawsuit against Allen was never about financial gain for my client, but instead holding Allen accountable. Unfortunately, civil litigation has few ways to punish wrongdoers; we could not ask the court to jail him, for example, or force him to change his behavior. One of the few remedies we do have in civil litigation is to ask the court to punish through monetary damages, which we did.”
I’ll be waiting for the follow up story about her donating all post legal fee earnings to charity.
March 20, 2024 @ 8:13 am
There will be no follow up story about the alleged victim donating her winnings to charity, because that would be in violation of the NDA. We don’t even know if there were any legal winnings because if that was disclosed, it would be in violation of the NDA. Jimmie Allen may have already violated the NDA by characterizing that the alleged victim “dropped” the case, and by saying that her claims were “lies.” We will never know the truth about the matter because of NDA. That’s my whole point. Part of the legal matter was settled. In the court of public opinion, nothing has been resolved.
March 19, 2024 @ 4:14 pm
Keep in mind that whereas the public often forgets the “innocent until proven guilty” or even “not liable until proven liable” concepts, they always seem to remember that being “found not guilty” is not the same as being “proven innocent.” There’s virtually no mechanism for proving your innocence in our world, as even a complete slam dunk, blowout showing at trial could still be written off as “the rich powerful musician used his charisma, influence and lawyers to look good” or “it’s so tough to prove guilt in today’s age, so she never stood a chance.”
And this says nothing of the reality that we as a society are increasingly recognizing the role power dynamics play in situations like this. So even if an accused person could not be found irrefutably not guilty in a court of law, it does not mean people would morally exonerate them of any perceived wrongdoing.
The point, here, is that there’s really no surefire pathway for overcoming allegations that gained this sort of traction. Maybe I’m missing an obvious example, but I can’t think of any notable abuse claim where the accused — whether they settled, won in court, successfully countersued, had the case dismissed, or anything in between — was immediately exonerated in the eyes of the general public. Some might have been in better position to recover, but I don’t think anyone was suddenly viewed as a perfect saint by all.
As far as 21st century situations go (where everything is documented in real-time for the public), Kobe Bryant is probably the best example of someone who ultimately achieved a favorable legacy even after SA allegations. But note that the state’s criminal case was dismissed when the accuser wouldn’t testify, so he never actually got a public “not guilty” ruling from a jury. He also publicly apologized to the accuser and settled the civil case. So I don’t think his formal exoneration rose to the level you described (“I just don’t see a mechanism where he would be completely exonerated unless a trial was held, and a judge or jury found the accusers accusations were without merit.”). But, ultimately, he found a path forward and left the world as one of the most beloved sports icons of all time.
The reality is that your best option is rarely going to be “winning a long, contentious trial.” It’s instead going to be time, excellence, and rehabilitation of character. True, you may never have enough of those quantities to ever fully restore your image in the eyes of the public, but if so, I’m not sure that a “not guilty” ruling would make any difference.
March 19, 2024 @ 9:03 pm
I think the Johnny Depp situation would be the best example of how you can win back over public opinion through trial. Did ugly and disturbing things come out about Johnny Depp during the trial? Yes. Did Depp even have to pay his ex some money at the end? Yes. By the end of the trial, had Depp completely changed public opinion about him? Absolutely.
The reason I felt the need to write this article is because I wanted to follow up on where this story was. But I also wanted to clarify other reporting on the matter that stemmed from the Jimmie Allen camp’s characterization of the matter, which was that the accuser dropped her accusations because they were false. Where the matter stands is a lot more complex than that at the moment.
March 20, 2024 @ 8:59 am
I thought about the Johnny Depp case when writing that comment, but I ultimately decided that his case was too unique to serve as a point of comparison.
For example, he has obsessive support from a primarily female/soccer mom fanbase. Jimmie Allen probably has more female fans than male fans, but I don’t think you’d say the support is “obsessive” – Johnny Depp was literally an all-time heartthrob to women who grew up in the 80s and 90s. That always muted some of the impact of any allegations against him.
Moreover, it also led to Amber Heard long being vilified as a psycho/gold digger, even before the case actually emerged. Just the idea of someone of her age/status canoodling with Johnny Depp made some fans dislike her, so I don’t think she was afforded the same “believe the female accuser” support that an anonymous woman might get in these cases.
Additionally, he was able to go on the offensive with some things she allegedly did – which not only muddied the case but also played into the “she’s the real villain” narrative that many already held. I admittedly don’t know every detail about the Jimmie Allen case, but my understanding is that his defense is “no, I didn’t do this” rather than “actually, she assaulted me.”
Finally, even though he had this unique situation and did essentially win the case and legally clear his name, it’s not like he totally came out unscathed. He’s not, like, in every movie – and people still do think about this case when his name comes up.
March 19, 2024 @ 2:36 pm
not related but i’ve been noticing more typos in SCM, usually perfectly written, pieces. Am i the only one? Did you change anything Trigger?
March 19, 2024 @ 3:31 pm
Nothing has changed. If you see typos, feel free to call them to my attention either in a comment or preferably through the Contact page and I will correct them. With 90% of the outlets in this space shutting down, hiring a full-time editor is not in the cards at this point.
March 20, 2024 @ 11:55 am
agreed, no big deal i was just curious. your work shedule must be unreal
March 19, 2024 @ 2:52 pm
why don’t you jut review the new Kacey record it’s not like Jimmie allen was ever a real country musician he was always a popstar
March 19, 2024 @ 3:53 pm
I will always prioritize stories about sexual assault or alleged sexual assault in the country music industry due to the seriousness of this issue. I’m sure I will get to Kacey Musgraves at some point. It’s not that the album wasn’t reviewed in lieu of this article.
March 19, 2024 @ 7:02 pm
Jimmie Allen posted to his social media today that he has 6 kids, which confirms that he did have an affair while his wife was pregnant. The mistress (who was reportedly a married fan girl) mother of his twins has public social accounts, so the timelines are all out there. Sounds like his wife divorced him recently, too, according to Reddit threads. Wouldn’t be surprised if he’s going to do a tell-all podcast or documentary to try to continue his career.
March 20, 2024 @ 8:16 am
Generally speaking, I don’t want to get into the People Magazine aspects of this issue. But I will say that his revelation about his twins out of wedlock not only verifies yet another extra-marital affair, it also dovetails with the second accuser’s story. She said that Jimmie Allen said to her that he wanted to get her pregnant. That is why he ejaculated inside of her. This wasn’t just a situation where they were fooling around and went to far. There seemed to be some sort of situation where Allen went beyond consent.
March 20, 2024 @ 7:27 am
listen, this dude probably belongs behind bars. But as a fan of music in general, more specifically real country music, I’ll have to settle for this poser being turned into nothing more than a footnote in the annals of music history. Let’s hope this clown goes away and never comes back.
March 20, 2024 @ 8:04 am
I think the “Me Too” stuff, just made me not care as much. A lot of the ladies come off as willing participants , until they don’t. That 30 year paycheck seems to alleviate a lot the PTSD. Once again, if you are hanging out at Hollywood parties, random hotels, …don’t expect Bible Study in the room at 3.am. It’s like a van with the *Free Candy* sign. P.S. I am nothing close to a Jimmie Allen fan, either. He definitely “committed murder, down on music row.”
March 20, 2024 @ 8:09 am
“if you are hanging out at Hollywood parties, random hotels, …don’t expect Bible Study in the room at 3.am.”
The alleged victim was hired to be Jimmie Allen’s day-to-day manager, meaning it was her job to be with him and coordinate his day. Jimmie Allen allegedly took advantage of that professional relationship. That is why the alleged victim also is suing her employer, Wide Open, and why that portion of the lawsuit is still ongoing. This is not a “she was asking for it” scenario.
March 20, 2024 @ 10:56 am
As Trigger noted, the scenario you described doesn’t remotely apply here. But even if it did, there’s a massive difference between feigning naivete and lying about giving consent. To put it another way, you have every right to know what you’re probably getting into … and still ultimately decide you don’t like how the situation feels.
I’d agree, as most would, that inviting someone back to your hotel room after a night at a party or the bar is likely an expression that you want to hook up. But it doesn’t mean that the person you’re inviting assumes you’re going to jump right into a gross, transactional tryst. They might think you’re going back to truly hang out, have a nightcap, see if you have chemistry, and then decide if it’s worth getting onto the bed. They might think there’s a chance to plant the seeds for a serious relationship. And if they get there and the situation doesn’t feel like that, they have every right to decline the hookup.
Additionally, there’s plenty of duplicity in the Hollywood hookup scene. I remember some female friends got invited to hang out at an “after party at a famous musician’s penthouse suite.” When they got there, it ended up being a tiny room at like a La Quinta with only his entourage – the famous musician was nowhere to be seen. They might have been very willing to hookup with the musician and even his friends at a penthouse after party; but that doesn’t mean they were obligated to do so when the situation wasn’t as described.
And even on a smaller scale, I’m sure we’ve all invited people back to our homes – or been invited to someone else’s home – with clear awareness that canoodling was probably on the table. And then it didn’t pan out for whatever reason. That’s OK – what would not be OK would be to feel obligated to participate (or entitled to force someone to participate) – because we “knew what we were probably getting into.”