- Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment (Gov. Code §12940(j))
- Workplace Harassment and Gender Violence (CC §52.4)
- Violation of California’s Ralph Act
- Sexual Assault and Battery (CC §340.16, CC §1708.5)
- Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and Retaliation
Notably, the plaintiff argues the case qualifies under California’s Sexual Abuse and Cover Up Accountability Act (AB 2777), reviving otherwise time-barred claims (p.10, ¶42).
Dixon is seeking compensatory and punitive damages and a jury trial.
As of press time, Perry has not filed a public response to the allegations. No criminal charges have been announced. Perry, known for his philanthropic work and ownership of the largest Black-owned studio in the U.S., has cultivated a reputation of empowerment — a narrative now facing serious legal and reputational scrutiny.
Dixon v. Perry et al., Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. 25STCV17235 (filed June 13, 2025).
🔗 Follow USA Herald on X @RealUSAHerald
