A sexual assault lawsuit filed against Steven Tyler has largely been dismissed.
The Aerosmith frontman had been the subject of legal action from Julia Misley, who alleged the Crazy singer "groomed" and "manipulated" her when she was a teenager, and essentially admitted his actions by referring to her as his almost "teen bride" in his memoir Does the Noise in My Head Bother You?.
However, Billboard reports that Judge Patricia A. Young ruled on Tuesday (28.04.26) that much of the long-delayed lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations in Massachusetts, where Julia and Steven lived during their three-year relationship.
However, because such limits don't apply due to a special rule in California, the judge ruled she can sue over an alleged sexual encounter during a brief trip to the state, but dismissed the rest of the lawsuit.
Steven's lawyer hailed the ruling a "massive win".
David Long-Daniels said in a statement: “This is a massive win for Steven Tyler.
“Today, the Court has dismissed with prejudice 99.9% of the claims against Mr. Tyler in this case. The court has decided that only one night, fifty-plus years ago, out of a three year relationship is allowed to remain. We look forward to trying this case on August 31.”
Julia first sued Steven in 2022, claiming she was the unnamed teenager referenced in his book and alleged he had used his fame to take control of her life, even signing an agreement with her parents to take legal guardianship, and sexually assaulted her for three years from 1973, when she was just 16 years old.
The 78-year-old rocker's lawyers had insisted they had a consensual "romantic relationship", and argued it was legal under the age of consent, which the judge ruled was likely true when it came to Massachusetts, where the legal age is 16, but even if Julia's allegations were valid, the case had been filed too late.
She wrote: “Plaintiff’s suit was filed more than 35 years after the alleged acts and more than 35 years after she turned 18.
"To be timely, this suit must have been filed within seven years.
“The parties travelled to California on one occasion and engaged in sexual relations here during that trip. The age of consent in California is, and was at all relevant times, 18. Thus, it was against the law for plaintiff and defendant to engage in sexual relations with each other in California because plaintiff was legally incapable of consenting.”
Citing the same statute of limitations reasons, accusations relating to alleged incidents in Washington and Oregon were also dismissed.
