A former OneTaste Inc. saleswoman is seeking dismissal — wholly or in part — of the sexual wellness company’s lawsuit that alleges she broke a non-disclosure agreement when she accused OneTaste of forcing her to have sex with men who were either members or customers of OneTaste classes.
After quitting, plaintiff Ayries Blanck moved to Ireland and changed her name to Ares Milligan. OneTaste sued Blanck in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging breach of contract and fraudulent inducement regarding their 2015 settlement agreement. The accord was related to her claims for sexual abuse harassment and wage violations that allegedly occurred when she was a OneTaste member and employee from 2010-15.
OneTaste alleges Blanck persuaded the company to settle with her by falsely promising to comply with the non-disclosure and non-disparagement provisions of the agreement while actually intending to break her promises by disclosing her accusations and the settlement agreement terms to the media starting in 2018. Her accusations were also part of a 2022 Netflix documentary.
But in court papers filed Wednesday with Judge Rupert Byrdsong in advance of an Oct. 22 hearing, Blanck’s attorney contends the three-year statute of limitations for fraud had run out by June 2021, more than a year before OneTaste filed the case in October 2022.
According to Blanck’s attorney’s court papers, undisputed facts show that while Blanck was a member and employee of OneTaste in New York, she had sex with many men who were members or customers of OneTaste, including her boyfriend. The two broke up in 2014 and he entered a relationship with another OneTaste member, Blanck’s lawyers further state.
After OneTaste founder Nicole Daedone refused an enraged Blanck’s request to break up her ex-boyfriend’s relationship with his new flame, Blanck left OneTaste and allegedly “embarked on a campaign to destroy OneTaste” and subsequently began talking to the media, Blanck’s attorney writes in his court papers.
OneTaste must have known, suspected or should have suspected that Blanck disclosed the existence and terms of the agreement to the media beginning in 2018, otherwise it would mean that OneTaste itself did so, Blanck’s attorney further states.
Even if OneTaste really was ignorant of Blanck’s possible fraud in connection with the widespread reporting about OneTaste in 2018, the statute of limitations still started to accrue and OneTaste was required to timely investigate and file a complaint within the limitations period, according to Blanck’s attorney’s court papers.
The lawsuit could have named “Doe” defendants and added Blanck in a later amended complaint, according to Blanck’s lawyer’s pleadings.