The former girlfriend of influencer Andrew Tate has obtained a dismissal on free-speech grounds of portions of his defamation countersuit, in which he contends she severely damaged his reputation by alleging the former professional kickboxer sexually abused her in a room of the Beverly Hills Hotel in March.
Brianna Stern, a 29-year-old model who dated Tate for nearly a year, filed a civil lawsuit against Tate for sexual assault and battery in Santa Monica Superior Court on March 27. Tate lives in Romania and Dubai and holds dual U.S. and United Kingdom citizenships. In his countersuit, Tate alleges that Stern knew her abuse allegations against him were false given that she was a “direct participant” in their consensual encounters.”
On Thursday, Judge Mark H. Epstein granted Stern’s motion insofar as Tate’s causes of action for libel and slander per se, intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process and part of his invasion of privacy claim. Tate can still move forward with his defamation/slander claim as well as one for misappropriation of likeness.
“Tate does not present direct evidence on the element of severe emotional distress,” the judge wrote in explaining his decision on that cause of action.
Regarding the defamation/slander claim that survived, Epstein said Tate gave a declaration denying he sexually assaulted Stern and that there are “inconsistencies in her presentation, money-seeking behavior and history with men. That is enough to defeat the motion.”
Tate filed the countersuit Aug. 12.
“Her intent was not to report misconduct, but to elevate her personal brand and adult content profile by exploiting (Tate’s) fame,” the countersuit alleges.
The damage to Tate’s reputation totals more than $50 million and includes lost sponsorships, cancelled business deals and irreversible damage to his global reputation, according to Tate’s lawyers.
Stern’s attorneys argued Tate’s countersuit should have been tossed in its entirety on First Amendment grounds.
“The name Andrew Tate is synonymous with misogynist,” Stern’s attorneys state in their court papers. “Many people might consider that defamatory if it was said about them, but for … Emory Andrew Tate III, that equivalence is by design.”
“All of Tate’s causes of action are subject to California’s anti-SLAPP statute, all of them fail and all should be stricken,” according to Stern’s attorneys’ pleadings.
The state’s anti-SLAPP — Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation — law is intended to prevent people from using courts, and potential threats of a lawsuit, to intimidate those who are exercising their First Amendment rights.
Tate filed the countersuit to harass and intimidate Stern and to generate leverage over her, just as he has done with many others who have dared challenge his “narcissism and perceived power,” Stern’s lawyers further contend in their pleadings.
In a sworn declaration, Stern said her relationship with Tate started off well.
“Initially after we met, Tate was extremely charming and affectionate,” Stern says. “I traveled to Romania several times to visit him and he visited me in Los Angeles … in March. Over this period of time, Tate told me he wanted to spend his life with me and have children with me.”
However, as their relationship progressed, Tate, now 38, became increasingly threatening, hostile and violent, “completely different from the charismatic person I first met,” according to Stern.
Stern further says that during the March encounter at the Beverly Hills Hotel, she initially consented to being intimate with Tate, but not to the alleged violence that followed.
“I did not consent to being choked, hit and verbally abused, and as stated I asked and begged Tate to stop,” Stern says. “I left the next morning as soon as I felt I could.”
Stern says she was later diagnosed with post-concussive syndrome. Trial is scheduled June 14, 2027.