The motion was filed Thursday in federal court in Hawaii, where Egan alleges that Ancier committed the abuse between August 1999 and October 1999 when Egan was 16.
The motion is similar to dismissal motions filed last week by “X-Men: Days of Future Past” director Bryan Singer, theme parks exec Gary Goddard and TV exec David Neuman.
Ancier said in the motion that he was not in Hawaii during that period, has never been to Hawaii with Egan, and has never been to the Paul Mitchell estate where the alleged assaults took place. The motion also named three other witnesses, including Ancier’s personal assistant Renate Radford, who have testified that Ancier never traveled to Hawaii during that period.
Ancier, like Singer, said the case should be dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction and cited Egan’s deposition in a separate 2000 sex abuse lawsuit filed against three executives of the Digital Entertainment Network.
Ancier’s motion also noted that the suit was filed by Egan’s attorney Jeff Herman in Hawaii to take advantage of the state’s extension of the statute of limitations in sexual assault cases.
Popular on Variety
“It is clear from Mr. Herman’s pre-litigation conduct that this litigation was brought solely to harass, shame and shake down Mr. Ancier and other Hollywood executives,” the motion said.
“These allegations are, like all of the other allegations in the Complaint, demonstrably false, and are part of transparent by a non-Hawaii resident — who did not even set foot in Hawaii himself during the time in question — to avail himself of Hawaii’s extended statute of limitations,” a memorandum said.
Egan made four claims in each suit — intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault, battery and invasion of privacy by unreasonable intrusion. Each of the suits recounts in explicit detail the sexual acts that allegedly took place between Egan and each of the men.
Jeff Herman, Egan’s lawyer, sent Variety the following statement after last week’s filing of Singer’s dismissal motion: “I do have a response, but I am restricted in that I can only talk about what is in the court record. Many of the things being reported are being taken out of context or you’re only hearing one side of the story. At the appropriate time and in the appropriate venue, we will respond.”