Press

Dixon v. Tyler Perry et. al.

Dixon v. Tyler Perry et al., now case number 1:25-cv-07102 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. A dated case timeline, updated as the docket moves.

Dixon v. Tyler Perry et al., now case number 1:25-cv-07102 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. A dated case timeline, updated as the docket moves.

We will do it together

Dixon v. Tyler Perry et. al.

Follow for updates on this case.

  • Complaint filed 13 June 2025 in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, case number 25STCV17235.
  • Now pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, case number 1:25-cv-07102-SEG-CCB.
  • Assigned to the Honourable Sarah E. Geraghty, referred to Magistrate Judge Christopher C. Bly.
  • Defendants are Tyler Perry, TPS Production Services, LLC and And Action, LLC.
  • The defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint was fully briefed on 22 June 2026 and is before the court.

Case timeline

Every entry below reflects a document filed with the court. This page is updated as the docket moves.

  • 13 June 2025 — Complaint filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, case number 25STCV17235.
  • 24 September 2025 — Defendants remove the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, case number 2:25-cv-09112.
  • 24 October 2025 — Plaintiff moves to remand the case to the Los Angeles Superior Court.
  • 27 October 2025 — Defendants move to dismiss the complaint or, in the alternative, to transfer the case to Georgia.
  • 12 December 2025 — The motion to remand is denied.
  • 12 December 2025 — The defendants' motion is granted in part and the action is transferred to the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, where it becomes case number 1:25-cv-07102-SEG-CCB.
  • 29 January 2026 — Brian J. Sutherland and Andrew M. Beal appear for Mr Dixon as Georgia counsel.
  • 10 March 2026 — The court grants Jonathan J. Delshad and Daniel Kohanbash admission pro hac vice.
  • 1 April 2026 — First Amended and Verified Complaint filed. It pleads six counts: wrongful discharge and retaliation in violation of California public policy; sex harassment under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act; a sexually hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; intentional infliction of emotional distress; sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act; and racketeering under the Georgia RICO Act.
  • 27 April 2026 — Defendants move to dismiss the amended complaint for failure to state a claim.
  • 22 May 2026 — Plaintiff files a response in opposition to the motion to dismiss.
  • 22 June 2026 — Defendants file their reply. The motion to dismiss is fully briefed.
  • 14 August 2026 — Plaintiff files notice of receipt of a Notice of Right to Sue from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

“These events occurred while Mr. Dixon was employed as a series regular on the Tyler Perry show 'The Oval,' and while Mr. Perry held direct control over his employment, compensation, and creative opportunities.”

In a complaint filed June 2025 in the Los Angeles Superior Court, plaintiff Derek Dixon alleges that defendant Tyler Perry engaged in a sustained pattern of quid pro quo sexual harassment, sexual assault, retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, while Perry was serving as Dixon’s employer and executive producer of the television series The Oval.

According to the suit, Perry “used his influence and control over employment and creative opportunities” to coerce Dixon into a sexually exploitative dynamic. Perry allegedly told Dixon, “Whoever ends up with me is gonna be a happy motherfucker,” and in another message asked, “What’s it going to take for you to have guiltless sex? Have y’all found that yet in therapy?”

The complaint details multiple unwanted sexual advances and assaults, including an incident in which Perry allegedly pulled off Dixon’s underwear and groped him, telling him to “relax” and that “[he] wasn’t going to hurt [Dixon].” When Dixon tried to resist, Perry reportedly responded, “You are the rose. But you are so blocked that you refuse to be smelt [sic] or opened.”

Dixon also alleges Perry promised to produce his TV pilot Losing It as part of a coercive exchange, but never intended to air it, stating the offer was made to maintain Dixon’s silence. Perry is further accused of threatening job security by saying characters could easily be killed off: “I love killing a mother fucker in a show that no one expects.”

The complaint originally filed in Los Angeles in June 2025 pleaded ten causes of action under California law, including violations of the FEHA, the Bane Act and the Ralph Act, and sought $260 million in damages. That pleading has been superseded by the First Amended and Verified Complaint filed in the Northern District of Georgia on 1 April 2026, which pleads the six counts listed in the timeline above.FEHA, Bane Act, and Ralph Act, and seeks $260 million in damages.

Press Coverage

Attorney advertising. This article is educational only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship, which exists only under a signed engagement agreement. Every case is different, and outcomes depend on the specific facts. Deadlines can run early, so consult a lawyer promptly about your situation.

NoteGeneral information, not legal advice. Attorney advertising.
Straight answers, on video

Watch the questions, answered.

Short video answers from the firm on the questions this article raises.

The first step costs nothing

Tell us what happened. We read it free.

Send it in a sentence or two. If there’s a case, we’ll tell you what it is and what to do next. If there isn’t, we’ll tell you that too, straight, and at no cost.

Confidential from the first call$0 unless we winA straight answer

Prefer to talk? Call (424) 255-8376. A real person answers.

Free case review

No win · No fee

A phone number or email, whichever you’d rather we use.

Confidential. Submitting this does not create an attorney-client relationship.