Phoebe Bridgers Gets Legal Revenge Against Studio Owner Who Sued Her Over Abuse Claims

Phoebe Bridgers has won another big court judgment against a recording studio owner who unsuccessfully sued the star for defamation after she accused him of “grooming” on social media.

Three years after Bridgers won a court ruling dismissing Chris Nelson’s libel case — a lawsuit she said was “frivolous” and meant to silence her abuse allegations — a Los Angeles judge on Thursday (July 24) awarded the singer $392,070, largely to cover hefty legal bills she spent defending herself.

The new award is on top of an earlier judgment of $496,608 already won by Bridgers, meaning Nelson now owes the star a whopping $888,768 over his failed legal action. A big portion of the new penalty is simply interest on the original, which Judge Joseph Lipner noted Nelson has “refused to pay” for more than two years.

Nelson, the owner of Los Angeles’ Sound Space recording studio, sued Bridgers in 2021, claiming she had defamed him by posting false information to Instagram as part of a “vendetta” designed to “destroy plaintiff’s reputation.”

The lawsuit centered on a series of October 2020 posts, in which Bridgers said she had “witnessed and can personally verify much of the abuse (grooming, stealing, violence) perpetuated by Chris Nelson.” She also directed her followers to a separate thread from friend Emily Bannon, which contained more extensive allegations against Nelson.

Her lawyers quickly moved to end the case, arguing that Nelson was abusing the court system to “chill Ms. Bridgers’ allegations of abusive conduct, which are protected by the First Amendment.” Her lawyers invoked California’s “anti-SLAPP” law, which bars lawsuits that might silence free speech and foists monetary penalties on those who bring them.

In November 2022, a Los Angeles judge sided with Bridgers, tossing the case out of court. Months later, the same judge awarded the singer $496,608, citing the anti-SLAPP law’s so-called fee-shifting provision that requires an unsuccessful accuser to reimburse their target’s legal bills.

Nelson appealed the dismissal of his case, but a California appellate court upheld the decision in November, ruling that Bridgers’ claims of abuse were clearly the kind of speech that’s protected under the anti-SLAPP law.

“The post related to public concerns, especially prevalent in light of the #MeToo movement, about men using their power to abuse women,” the appeals court wrote at the time. “When public allegations of abuse are corroborated, it serves not only to further the discussion of the specific claims at issue, but also to embolden others who are being victimized to come forward.”

With that ruling in hand — and the original judgment still unpaid — Bridgers went after Nelson again. In March, she demanded that he repay the money she spent litigating the appeal, as well as substantial interest on the original. She said he had “not paid a penny” of the original fine and was “evading collection efforts.”

Attorneys for Nelson did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday (July 25).