Michael Ovitz, co-founder of Creative Artists Agency (CAA), abruptly left a deposition on June 1 after attorneys pressed him repeatedly about his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, Variety reports. Epstein’s criminal history involving sex offenses makes this information critical to Julia Ormond’s ongoing legal battle.
His continuing association with Epstein following Epstein’s conviction for sex offenses is directly relevant to the case, as TheWrap explains.
In his testimony, Ovitz made representations about actions he would have taken regarding Harvey Weinstein had he known Weinstein was credibly accused of sexual misconduct, according to Variety’s report.
On June 1, Ovitz was deposed as part of Julia Ormond’s lawsuit filed under New York’s Adult Survivors Act targeting CAA, Weinstein, Miramax, and Disney. Ormond alleges that Harvey Weinstein sexually assaulted her in December 1995 while she was signed with CAA. Ovitz, a former CAA executive, was subpoenaed to testify.
Ormond’s legal team accuses Ovitz of dodging testimony about Weinstein’s misconduct and filed a motion for contempt and sanctions on June 12 due to his sudden exit during Epstein-related questioning. Ovitz had previously avoided an earlier deposition. A New York Supreme Court ruling earlier this March forced him to testify.
Legal and public impact
This situation raises tough questions about accountability among powerful Hollywood figures. Ormond’s attorneys argue Ovitz’s ongoing ties to Epstein, despite Epstein’s sex crime conviction, demonstrate a lack of ethical responsibility that harms Ovitz’s credibility. Kevin Mintzer, legal counsel for Ormond, emphasized the need to understand Ovitz’s knowledge and decisions, which could reveal CAA’s role in enabling Weinstein’s misconduct, as Variety reports.
What it means
Ovitz’s walking out during Epstein-related questioning signals tough battles ahead for CAA and its leadership amid Ormond’s lawsuit. Many see his exit as reluctance to fully engage with allegations linking him to Epstein and Weinstein’s misconduct, which could weaken his legal defense. Courts might respond by imposing sanctions, demanding full testimony, or expanding scrutiny on Ovitz’s potential role in protecting or ignoring sexual abuse claims within the agency. TheWrap notes that this confrontation may trigger deeper discovery requests into Ovitz’s communications about Epstein and Weinstein.