A California judge on Thursday spiked Odell Beckham Jr.’s bid to toss part of a lawsuit brought against him by a man who claims he was assaulted in the Giants star’s house.
The Pro Bowl wideout is being sued for $15 million by his former friend, Ishmael Temple, who claims he was attacked at Beckham’s Beverly Hills home back in January.
He accused Beckham of going “into overdrive to discredit him” following the filing of his lawsuit in March.
Temple’s lawyer, Emmanuel Nshalai, claims the athlete has been “leaking false stories about him to the media” and “got him blacklisted as an event organizer and promoter in Hollywood.”
In response, Beckham’s legal team filed an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the defamation and false light causes of action in the suit — arguing that the NFL star was protected by his First Amendment rights to free speech.
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge denied their request, however, and acknowledged the “somewhat conclusionary nature of [the] evidence” presented by Temple.
“While we are disappointed with the Court’s ruling today on our procedural challenge, it does not change any of the underlying facts of this case,” Beckham’s legal team said in a statement. “To be clear, Mr. Temple had an extremely low burden to meet — as Mr. Nsahlai stated in his Opposition to our Motion — all he had to do was demonstrate ‘minimal merit’ of his defamation and false light claims.”
Nshalai, meanwhile, applauded the judge’s decision.
“This ruling vindicates what the victim of the assault and battery Mr. Ishmael Temple has said all along,” he told The Post. “We showed to the court declarations from over five separate witnesses who — on information and belief are scared of offending Mr. Beckham and losing his connections as well as those of his friends in the NFL and entertainment industry — submitted declarations under penalty of perjury regarding Mr. Beckham’s relationship to Mr. Temple, and regarding the attack on Mr. Temple by guards and chefs working for Mr. Beckham.”
Nshalai said that “despite the extremely high protections afforded to First Amendment rights to free speech,” the court “rightfully” allowed the defamation and false light claims to proceed.
“The Judge opined we have demonstrated a likelihood of prevailing on the merits of those causes of actions,” Nshalai added. “We had a very high burden to jump over on this anti-SLAPP motion, and we prevailed, which shows the strength of our case.”
Beckham’s legal team, however, downplayed the decision.
“Despite noting that Mr. Temple did not meet even that minimal burden…and that substantial problems exist with the evidence provided by Mr. Temple, the Court found that Mr. Temple made the ‘bare minimum’ of a showing such that the Court could not simply dismiss the claims,” they said. “Any contention that the Court agreed with Mr. Temple claims, or found that he had a likelihood of prevailing, reflects a fundamental disconnect with the law and what actually happened at today’s hearing. The Court was acting as a gatekeeper, and reluctantly found that Mr. Temple’s defamation and false light claims squeaked by.”
Beckham has filed his own lawsuit in LA Superior Court against Temple, under the claim that he’s trying to extort him. His legal team alleges that Temple and Nshalai unsuccessfully tried pressuring them into paying a $999,999 settlement.
“Mr. Beckham understands he is a target for these sort of litigants, but refuses to be extorted,” his lawyers said. “We will continue to vigorously defend this action, and expect to ultimately prevail on the merits.”
