Dancers Suing Lizzo Demand They Be Allowed to Grill Singer’s Witnesses Who Refute Toxic Workplace Claims
The dancer said she was eventually fired by Lizzo "in front of everyone."
Nov. 2 2023, Published 12:30 p.m. ET
The three dancers suing Lizzo over an alleged hostile work environment rushed back to court after the singer used 18 of her employees to try and refute their claims.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, dancers Arianna Davis, Noelle Rodriguez, and Crystal Williams are demanding they be allowed to depose the tour members who recently submitted declarations for Lizzo.
Earlier this year, Davis, Rodriguez, and Williams sued Lizzo and her dancer captain Shirlene Quigley. In the suit, the dancers, who worked for the singer from 2021 to 2023, said they were forced to resign due to the working conditions.
The three accused Lizzo of forcing them to attend explicit shows in Amsterdam and Paris. The dancers claimed the entertainer told them to touch the nude performers.
In addition, they detailed several instances where they claimed Lizzo was a terror during practices.
In regard to Quigley, the dancers claimed the captain created a “sexually charged and uncomfortable” work environment.
The suit accused Quigley, who was vocal about her religious beliefs, of taking every “every opportunity to proselytize to any and all in her presence regardless of protestations.”
Davis said the captain became overbearing when learned she was a virgin.
The suit read, “Ms. QUIGLEY discovered that Ms. DAVIS was a virgin and Ms. DAVIS’s virginity became a topic of extreme importance to Ms. QUIGLEY. In the months to follow, Ms. QUIGLEY would routinely bring up Ms. DAVIS’s virginity in conversations with Ms. DAVIS. Ms. QUIGLEY even mentioned Ms. DAVIS’s virginity in interviews she participated in and later posted to social media, broadcasting an intensely personal detail about Ms. DAVIS to the world.
The dancers sued Quigley for religious and sexual harassment.
The women said while Quigley was religious that didn’t stop her from simulating “oral sex on a banana in front of the rest of the dance cast.”
“These instances were always unprompted and made plaintiffs uncomfortable,” the lawsuit read.
“[Shirlene’s] sexually explicit comments were so pervasive the entire dance team knew about her sexual fantasy of having ten p----- in her face,” the lawsuit added.
Lizzo and Quigley denied all allegations filed in the lawsuit.
This week, Lizzo filed declarations from 18 independent members of her touring company. The employees disputed the claims made by the dancers in their lawsuit.
One dancer, Kiara Mooring, said she was not forced to attend the adult show.
She said, "This claim also makes no sense because plenty of the dancers (myself included) did not go to Bananenbar that night and we still have our job dancing with Lizzo."
Another dancer, Melissa Locke, said she spoke to Davis and Rodriguez the morning after the show in question,
She said, "They never said they felt uncomfortable or pressured. They were very enthusiastic about what a great night out they had.
"However, I began to feel that I needed to use the restroom, but I was afraid that if I left the stage I would be fired. I continued on as long as I could, but I eventually lost control of my bladder," the dancer claimed.
Locke added, "I remember telling them, 'That sounds like so much fun, I wish you had woken me up to go with you.' They agreed that it was a fun night and told me that they went out in the Red Light District after. They did not complain or sound upset in any way."
Another dancer, Alaini Walker, wrote, "In my experience, there was absolutely no body shaming on tour. I have experienced racial discrimination, sexual harassment and body shaming in this industry, but never while working with Lizzo. In fact, Lizzo’s tour felt like the opposite of many negative experiences I have had as a dancer."
Now, the three dancers suing have demanded the court allow them to depose all 18 employees.
Their lawyer said, “Plaintiffs believe taking of the depositions will provide a reasonable probability of success on the claims in that the declarations submitted are all of individuals currently associated with and employed by Defendants This creates a strong implication that the declarations were signed in an attempt to “keep the boss happy,” implicitly intimidate the Plaintiffs, and create a skewed narrative by merely repeating it 20 times compared to the reality that Plaintiffs lived and suffered through.”
A judge has yet to rule.