close
close

first Drop

Com TW NOw News 2024

news

Disney loses last attempt to block lawsuit against Gina Carano over dismissal

Unless there is a shift in jurisdiction or a big-money settlement, the Disney and Gina Carano will face off next year in the lawsuit over the former mixed martial artist’s 2021 firing. The Mandalorian.

That process will begin on September 29, 2025, to be specific.

After beating the Mouse House and its Daniel Petrocelli-led legal team earlier this year to get her Elon Musk-backed sex discrimination and wrongful dismissal lawsuit dismissed, Carano scored another winner this week, with a federal judge rejecting Disney’s desire for a stay of the procedure and interim appeal.

“After reviewing the parties’ arguments, the relevant law, and the record in this case, the Court DENIES the motion,” U.S. District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett wrote earlier this week. By refusing to give the green light to Disney’s hopes to take the case to another court and overturning its July 24 decision rejecting their motion to dismiss, the ruling has left the trial clock ticking.

Because her earlier ruling was challenged by the nature of Disney’s final motion and desire to appeal, Garnett made sure to quash any notion that Disney and its outside counsel would or would not prevail.

“However, Defendants do not explain how a Ninth Circuit opinion affirming the Court’s order would alleviate the burden of responding to the discovery that Plaintiff has proposed to date, nor is it clear to the Court how such a decision could provide such relief,” Garnett said. writes in the order of 10 pages. “In any event, arguments regarding discovery – which, the Court notes, were not addressed in the order – do not appear to have any bearing on the termination of the trial and do not convince the Court that certification here his place.”

In other words, don’t waste my time, we’re all adults here.

The judge may have given her opinion on all this last month, when she decided that no oral arguments were necessary on the appeal statement or the lawyers’ suspension. On September 19, the case list stated: “no appearance necessary.”

With this new order from Garnett allowing discovery to move forward, it means Carano and her lawyers will soon take a look at what happened internally at Disney three years ago leading up to the on-the-rise actress’ firing , which played Rebel shock trooper Cara Dune The Mandaloriandue to the views she has expressed on social media and otherwise.

Whether that leads to the order giving Carano her job back is another matter entirely. Still, by also seeking a series of unspecified damages, Carano took victory today.

“I am obviously very pleased with the opportunity to move forward with the judicial process and discovery,” she wrote on social media Thursday about the Oct. 15 order. “While I wish this were not necessary, as it is not my desire to be present in this battle in court, I will not shy away from it because it is difficult or uncomfortable.”

Disney had no comment on this latest twist in the Carano case when contacted by Disney.

In the April 9 motion to dismiss Carano’s lawsuit for dismissal The MandalorianDisney, as before, insisted that the ex-martial arts fighter lose her fame Star Wars series appearance three years ago for her decision “to publicly downplay the Holocaust by comparing criticism of political conservatives to the destruction of millions of Jewish people – specifically, not ‘thousands’ – was the final straw for Disney.”

After playing fan-fave bounty hunter Cara Dune for two seasons, this all came to a breaking point when Carano shared a TikTok post in 2021 that sought to compare America’s current divided political climate to Nazi Germany.

In May, Carano’s lawyers, Schaerr Jaffe, responded: “After admitting that they had discriminated against Carano because of her personal political beliefs and subjected her to disparate treatment by her similar male co-stars, The Walt Disney Company, Lucasfilm LTD and Huckleberry Industries (collectively “Defendants”) claim that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution gives them absolute immunity.”

“Defendants are wrong.”

Clearly, the judge in the case agrees, at least to some extent.