On Wednesday, Cowboys quarterback Dak Prescott got a win in court, in connection with a seven-year-old sexual assault claim made earlier this year. His attorney issued a statement confirming the decision by Judge Angela Tucker to dismiss the case against Prescott.
“Despite Ms. Shores and her legal team’s relentless efforts to extort money and damage Dak’s reputation, justice has consistently prevailed and will continue to do so,” Levi McCathern said. “The original lies by [the accuser], her team, and their recent failed attempt to sue him civilly are all just a continuation of their extortion plot against Dak. These ploys distract from the trauma of legitimate sexual assault survivors and undermine the progress that our society has made in supporting them. We are proud that Dak stands up against this injustice and thankful Judge Tucker agrees.”
The specifics of the decision aren’t clear. Although the introductory paragraph to the press release containing McCathern’s statement explains that Judge Tucker found that the claims “lacked merit and should be dismissed immediately,” it’s very rare for a dismissal to happen this quickly without some specific legal flaw in the filing. In ruling on motions to dismiss filed at the outset of a case, the judge typically accepts the factual allegations as true, with the question being whether the law as applied to those allegations, even if 100 percent accurate, requires the case to be thrown out of court.
There’s no written decision, yet. The V.P. of marketing with the McCathern Shokouhi Evans firm explained via email that a proposed order was submitted to Judge Tucker, and that yesterday’s decision was made from the bench — presumably during oral argument on Prescott’s motion to dismiss.
The sexual assault claim was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Because Prescott initially sued the accuser for extortion arising from her lawyers’ efforts to settle her allegations out of court, the sexual assault claim was made based on a provision of Texas civil procedure that arguably allows otherwise time-barred claims to be pursued, if they are part of a counterclaim. Yesterday’s ruling quite possibly was confined to the question of whether that exception applies in this case, and not a statement that the allegations of sexual assault is false.
One of the accuser’s lawyers, Yoel Zehaie, did not respond to an email sent by PFT on Wednesday seeking comment on this development.
There’s no reason to doubt that the civil claims against Prescott were dismissed. The final order signed by Judge Tucker will say plenty about the reason(s) for dismissing the case.
Prescott previously was cleared of any potential criminal wrongdoing. His claims against the accuser and her lawyers are pending. On September 13, Judge Tucker will take up the question of whether the accuser and/or her lawyers should be sanctioned for making a frivolous claim.