What Is the Garth Brooks Lawsuit?
The Garth Brooks lawsuit is a civil sexual assault and battery case that a former hair and makeup artist, identified as Jane Roe, filed against country singer Garth Brooks, not a class action or multidistrict litigation. One plaintiff sued one defendant, and the case is paired with a separate suit Brooks filed against Roe in Mississippi.
Roe filed the case in Los Angeles County Superior Court on October 3, 2024, and it was later moved to federal court. Her complaint says she worked as a stylist for Trisha Yearwood from 1999 and for Brooks from 2017. Brooks denies the allegations and describes them as an attempt to extort him.
"Garth Brooks lawsuit" can also point to Brooks's own Mississippi case, Doe v. Roe, which is a separate proceeding covered under the comparison heading below.
“As set forth below, Ms. Roe commences this action pursuant to California's Sexual Abuse and Cover-Up Accountability Act, AB 2777, because her claims are "based on conduct that occurred on or after January 1, 2009, and [are] commenced []after January 1, 2019," see Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 340.16(b)(3). Ms. Roe seeks all appropriate relief to redress Brooks' egregious and unlawful actions in violation of common law torts for Assault and Battery, and in violation of California state statutes for Sexual Battery, Ca. Civ. Code § 1708.5; the Bane Act, Ca. Civ. Code § 52.1; the Ralph Act, Ca. Civ. Code § 51.7; and Gender Violence, Ca. Civ. Code § 52.4(c)(2).”
Source: Source: Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Jane Roe v. Garth Brooks, Complaint for Damages and Demand for Jury Trial, paragraph 33 (filed October 3, 2024)
Why Was the Garth Brooks Lawsuit Filed?
The Garth Brooks lawsuit was filed because Roe alleges that Brooks sexually assaulted her during two work trips to Los Angeles in 2019, while she was working for him as a hair and makeup stylist. Her complaint dates the first alleged assault to May 11, 2019, during a trip for a Grammy tribute event, and describes a second set of alleged incidents on a five-day trip beginning October 28, 2019.
Roe's complaint also says it was brought under California's Sexual Abuse and Cover-Up Accountability Act, known as AB 2777. The complaint states that her claims are timely under that law because the alleged conduct occurred after January 1, 2009 and the case was commenced after January 1, 2019. Only a court can decide whether that timeliness argument holds.
The case sits in California, not Mississippi, because the complaint says the alleged events happened in Los Angeles. Roe lives in Mississippi, which is why Brooks chose to file his own suit there first. Roe's lawyers argue Brooks's Mississippi filing was a forum-shopping maneuver, and Brooks's side says Roe's claims grew out of a financial dispute after he declined her requests for more pay and benefits.
What Harms Does the Garth Brooks Lawsuit Allege?
The Garth Brooks lawsuit alleges harm through eight claims across two proceedings: six causes of action in Roe's California complaint and two claims Brooks raised against Roe in Mississippi. Roe's complaint seeks damages for physical and emotional harm, and Brooks's Mississippi suit seeks relief for what he describes as extortion and reputational harm.
Brooks denies every allegation Roe makes, and no court has ruled on the merits of either side's claims. Each item below describes what a party alleges, not what a court has found.
Assault
In a civil lawsuit, assault is a legal claim for intentionally causing another person to reasonably fear imminent harmful or offensive contact.
Roe's first cause of action pleads assault, alleging that Brooks arranged in advance for her to share a hotel suite with him during the May 2019 Los Angeles trip and isolated her from other employees. The complaint pleads this claim separately from battery, although both rest on the same alleged hotel incident.
Battery
Battery is a legal claim for harmful or offensive physical contact made without consent.
Roe's second cause of action pleads battery, which her complaint labels civil sexual assault, and alleges the contact was against her will and that she was physically unable to resist. The complaint seeks punitive damages on this claim, alleging willful and malicious conduct, which is a standard that must be proven at trial.
Sexual Battery
Under California Civil Code section 1708.5, sexual battery is a legal claim for intentionally causing sexually offensive contact with another person without consent.
Roe's third cause of action invokes section 1708.5 of the California Civil Code and rests on the same May 2019 allegations as the battery claim. The complaint states this claim is timely under AB 2777, the California law that revived and extended the filing window for certain sexual assault claims.
Bane Act
The Bane Act, California Civil Code section 52.1, is a state law that lets a person sue over interference with legal rights through threats, intimidation, or coercion.
Roe's fourth cause of action alleges that Brooks interfered, by threat, intimidation, coercion, and physical force, with her right to be free from sexual assault and sex discrimination under California law. The complaint pleads this claim in a single short count that relies on the facts alleged earlier in the document.
Ralph Act
The Ralph Act, California Civil Code section 51.7, is a state law that protects people from violence or threats of violence committed because of a protected characteristic, such as sex.
Roe's fifth cause of action alleges that Brooks committed a violent act against her on May 11, 2019 that was motivated by her sex, in that he could not have committed the same act against a man. The count also cites the later five-day trip beginning October 28, 2019 as part of the alleged conduct.
Gender Violence
Under California Civil Code section 52.4, gender violence is a civil claim, recognized as a form of sex discrimination, for certain sexually violent acts committed against a person.
Roe's sixth cause of action pleads gender violence under section 52.4(c)(2) and ties it to the same May 11, 2019 Los Angeles allegations and the October 2019 trip. Because the claim is statutory, it can carry attorney's fees if a plaintiff prevails, and Roe's prayer for relief asks for fees under section 52.4.
Defamation
Defamation is a legal claim for a false statement of fact that harms a person's reputation.
Brooks's Mississippi suit against Roe alleges that her accusations are false and damaging to his reputation. He first filed under the pseudonym John Doe on September 13, 2024, and later amended his complaint to name both parties, seeking damages for defamation and emotional distress.
Extortion
Extortion is the alleged use of threats to obtain money or property from another person.
Brooks's Mississippi suit alleges that Roe's lawyers threatened to sue him publicly unless he paid her millions of dollars, which he calls an attempted extortion. Roe's side disputes that characterization, and it points to settlement discussions that, according to her filings, were underway when Brooks filed first.
What Is the Current Status of the Garth Brooks Lawsuit?
The current status of the Garth Brooks lawsuit is pending, with the California case stayed and a Fifth Circuit appeal over Roe's anonymity still undecided as of November 2026. Two proceedings drive the dispute, Roe's California case and Brooks's Mississippi case, and the tables below track each one.
No trial date has been set in either case, and no court has ruled on whether any allegation is true.
Jane Roe v. Garth Brooks
Roe filed Jane Roe v. Garth Brooks in Los Angeles County Superior Court on October 3, 2024, with lawyers from Girard Bengali, Wigdor LLP, and HB Advocates, and Brooks moved the case to federal court in early November 2024. U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald denied Brooks's motion to dismiss without prejudice in December 2024 and stayed the case behind the Mississippi action.
| Court | Los Angeles County Superior Court, moved to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California |
| Case Number | 2:24-cv-09462 (federal docket, as listed by Law360) |
| Filed | October 3, 2024 |
| Judge | U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald |
| Claims | Assault, battery, sexual battery, Bane Act, Ralph Act, gender violence |
| Relief Sought | Compensatory and punitive damages, attorney's fees, and costs; no dollar figure stated |
| Status | Stayed pending the Mississippi action |
Judge Fitzgerald's order required Brooks to tell the court about any rulings in the Mississippi action within ten court days, and a hearing scheduled for the following week was vacated. Brooks has argued the California case has been stayed for nearly 80 percent of the roughly 20 months it had been pending by spring 2026.
Doe v. Roe
Brooks filed Doe v. Roe in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi on September 13, 2024, before Roe's California complaint, using the pseudonym John Doe. He later amended the complaint to name both parties, and Judge Henry Wingate has presided over the case.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi, Northern Division |
| Case Number | 3:24-cv-00547-HTW-LGI |
| Filed | September 13, 2024 |
| Judge | U.S. District Judge Henry T. Wingate |
| Claims | Declaratory judgment that Roe's accusations are false, plus extortion and defamation allegations |
| Latest Development | Roe's appeal of the pseudonym ruling is pending at the Fifth Circuit; no ruling reported as of June 25, 2026 |
| Status | Active, no trial date reported |
Judge Wingate ruled on May 1, 2025 that Roe's motion to dismiss was moot, and in September 2025 he denied Roe's requests to proceed under a pseudonym, to seal the amended complaint, and for sanctions against Brooks. Roe appealed the anonymity portions of that order to the Fifth Circuit in November 2025, and in May 2026 a three-judge panel denied Brooks's motion to expedite that appeal.
Has the Garth Brooks Lawsuit Been Settled?
No. The Garth Brooks lawsuit has not been settled, and no settlement, verdict, or trial date has been reported in either the California or the Mississippi case as of November 2026.
Roe's complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages without stating a dollar amount, so no court-filed figure exists for what the case could be worth. Any outcome would depend on rulings that have not happened yet, including the Fifth Circuit's decision on anonymity and the lifting of the California stay.
Brooks has said publicly that he was pressed to pay "many millions of dollars" before the case was filed, and his Mississippi filings describe a demand letter dated July 17, 2024 and a follow-up dated August 23, 2024. Those figures come from Brooks's own account of the pre-suit letters, not from a court finding, and Roe's side disputes his description of them.
Brooks told fans on October 7, 2024 that people had told him the legal fight could take up to two years, and the case has now run roughly two years since that statement. A civil case that resolves by settlement can end at any stage, but no public reporting indicates that talks are active.
Garth Brooks Lawsuit Updates and Case Status
Here is the current status of the Garth Brooks lawsuit, updated with new filings, rulings, and case-count reports as they're confirmed. Roe v. Brooks in California and Doe v. Roe in Mississippi continue in active pretrial proceedings as of November 2026, with no global settlement reached. See the full timeline below for every confirmed development since the litigation began.
Garth Brooks Lawsuit Timeline
Brooks Argues Roe's Appeal Filing Waived Her Anonymity
Brooks's lawyers told the Fifth Circuit that Jane Roe's own record excerpts disclosed her identity, which they called a manifest anonymity waiver and grounds to reject her appeal, according to a June 25, 2026 report. Briefing in the Fifth Circuit appeal was still underway, and the court had not ruled.
Roe's Appeal Filing Includes Unredacted Names
Roe's side filed record excerpts in the Fifth Circuit appeal on May 20, 2026 that contained both parties' full legal names, and her lawyers later asked the court for permission to correct the filing. The excerpts remained publicly available on the docket for more than a month.
Fifth Circuit Denies Brooks's Motion to Expedite the Appeal
A three-judge Fifth Circuit panel denied Brooks's motion to expedite Roe's appeal in early May 2026, as reported May 9, 2026. Brooks had argued that witness memories were fading and that the death of his longtime publicist, Nancy Seltzer, showed evidence was being lost, while Roe's opening brief was due May 20, 2026.
Roe Appeals the Pseudonym Ruling to the Fifth Circuit
Roe filed a notice of appeal in November 2025, reported November 5, 2025, challenging only the parts of Judge Henry Wingate's September 2025 order that denied her requests to remain anonymous and to seal the amended complaint. She did not appeal the denial of her sanctions request.
Judge Wingate Denies Roe's Pseudonym and Sealing Requests
U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate denied Roe's motion to proceed under a pseudonym and her motion to seal Brooks's amended Mississippi complaint in September 2025, as reported September 29, 2025. He also denied her request for sanctions against Brooks, reasoning that her identity was already public.
Mississippi Judge Rules Roe's Motion to Dismiss Moot
U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate ruled on May 1, 2025 that Roe's motion to dismiss Brooks's Mississippi suit, filed nearly six months earlier, was moot. The ruling did not end Doe v. Roe, and local station WLBT reported on it on May 11, 2025.
California Judge Denies Brooks's Motion to Dismiss and Stays the Case
U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald denied Brooks's motion to dismiss Roe's California case without prejudice, as reported December 17, 2024, and stayed the case pending the Mississippi action. The order directed Brooks to report any Mississippi rulings within ten court days and vacated a hearing set for the following week.
Brooks Moves Roe's California Case to Federal Court
Brooks's lawyers moved Jane Roe v. Garth Brooks from Los Angeles County Superior Court to federal court in early November 2024, and Law360 lists the federal docket as 2:24-cv-09462 in the Central District of California. Reports differ on whether the removal was filed on November 1 or November 8.
Brooks Names Roe in His Mississippi Filings
Brooks identified Roe by name in Mississippi court papers in October 2024, days after she sued in California, and his filings said Roe worked for him as an independent contractor for about 15 years before moving to Mississippi. Roe's lawyers condemned the naming and called Brooks's Mississippi case a forum-shopping maneuver.
Brooks Tells Fans the Legal Fight Is On
Brooks addressed the lawsuit on his Facebook Live show on October 7, 2024, saying the case was going to happen and that he had been told it could take up to two years. He had also told Rolling Stone he had been hassled for two months with threats over a demand for many millions of dollars, which Roe's side disputes.
Roe Files Her Sexual Assault Complaint in Los Angeles
Roe, a former hair and makeup stylist for Brooks, filed Jane Roe v. Garth Brooks in Los Angeles County Superior Court on October 3, 2024, pleading six causes of action and demanding a jury trial. Brooks has denied the allegations.
Brooks Files His Mississippi Suit Against Roe
Brooks filed John Doe v. Jane Roe in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi on September 13, 2024, under the Declaratory Judgment Act, asking the court to declare Roe's accusations false. Roe's lawyers say the filing came without warning while settlement talks were ongoing.
Roe's Lawyers Send a Second Letter to Brooks
Roe's attorneys sent Brooks a follow-up letter on August 23, 2024, stating that she would refrain from suing publicly in exchange for a multi-million dollar payment, according to Brooks's court filings. Roe's side disputes how Brooks characterizes the letters.
Roe's Lawyer Sends a Confidential Demand Letter
A confidential letter from Roe's attorney dated July 17, 2024 alleged sexual grooming, a sexually hostile work environment, unwanted sexual touching, and sexual assault, and Brooks says it was the first time he learned of the allegations.
How Has Garth Brooks Responded to the Lawsuit?
Garth Brooks has responded to the lawsuit by denying every allegation, describing the accusation as an attempted extortion, and suing Roe first in Mississippi. He told Rolling Stone that being pressed to pay many millions of dollars felt like having a loaded gun waved in his face, and he said he trusts the legal system and does not fear the truth.
In court filings, Brooks says Roe worked for him as an independent contractor for about 15 years and began asking for more financial help after moving to Mississippi in 2020. He says she asked for a salary with medical benefits and made the accusations only after he declined. Roe's lawyers reject that account and say Brooks's Mississippi suit was a forum-shopping maneuver meant to deny her access to California's anti-SLAPP law.
Brooks's wife, singer Trisha Yearwood, is not a party to either case. Roe's complaint says Roe began working for Yearwood in 1999 and for Brooks in 2017.
Is the Garth Brooks Lawsuit the Same as Brooks's Mississippi Case Against Jane Roe?
No. The Garth Brooks lawsuit refers to two legally separate cases that arise from the same dispute, and each has its own court, judge, and claims. Roe's California case accuses Brooks of sexual assault, while Brooks's Mississippi case asks a court to declare Roe's accusations false and alleges extortion and defamation.
| Case | Plaintiff | Court | Filed | Main Claims |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jane Roe v. Garth Brooks (this page's main case) | Jane Roe | Federal court in California, after removal from Los Angeles Superior Court | October 3, 2024 | Assault, battery, sexual battery, Bane Act, Ralph Act, gender violence |
| Doe v. Roe (Brooks's case) | Garth Brooks | U.S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi | September 13, 2024 | Declaratory judgment, extortion, defamation |
The two cases are linked because Judge Fitzgerald stayed the California case behind the Mississippi one, so developments in Mississippi, including the anonymity appeal, currently control the pace of both. A ruling in one case does not decide the other.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Garth Brooks lawsuit about?
The Garth Brooks lawsuit is a civil case in which a former hair and makeup artist, identified as Jane Roe, accuses country singer Garth Brooks of sexual assault and battery during two 2019 work trips to Los Angeles. Brooks denies the allegations and filed his own Mississippi suit against Roe on September 13, 2024.
Is the Garth Brooks lawsuit a class action?
No. The Garth Brooks lawsuit is a single-plaintiff civil case, not a class action or multidistrict litigation. One plaintiff, Jane Roe, sued one defendant, and there is no group of similarly situated people who can join the case.
Has the Garth Brooks lawsuit settled?
No. The Garth Brooks lawsuit has not settled, and no settlement, verdict, or trial date has been reported as of November 2026. Roe's complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages without naming a dollar figure.
Who filed a lawsuit against Garth Brooks?
A former hair and makeup artist identified in court papers as Jane Roe filed the lawsuit against Garth Brooks in Los Angeles County Superior Court on October 3, 2024. Her complaint says she worked for Trisha Yearwood from 1999 and for Brooks from 2017.
What is the current status of the Garth Brooks lawsuit?
The current status of the Garth Brooks lawsuit is pending. The California case is stayed behind Brooks's Mississippi suit, and the Fifth Circuit has not ruled on Roe's appeal over whether she may proceed anonymously, as of the latest reporting in June 2026.
Is the Garth Brooks lawsuit the same as his lawsuit against Jane Roe?
No. The Garth Brooks lawsuit from Roe in California and Brooks's Mississippi suit, Doe v. Roe, are two separate cases from the same dispute. Roe's case alleges sexual assault, while Brooks's case asks a court to declare her accusations false and alleges extortion and defamation.
Is Trisha Yearwood involved in the Garth Brooks lawsuit?
No. Trisha Yearwood, Brooks's wife, is not a party to either case in the Garth Brooks lawsuit. Roe's complaint says she worked as Yearwood's hair and makeup stylist from 1999 before working for Brooks.