Danny Elfman is asking that what remains of a pianist's defamation lawsuit filed against him be resolved in arbitration — but the plaintiff is fighting the request, arguing he never raised the arbitration issue until very recently.
Nomi Abadi's attorneys filed court papers on Monday with Los Angeles Superior Court Judge William E. Weinberger, ahead of an October 23 hearing, urging the judge to deny Elfman's arbitration motion. Abadi's lawsuit pertains to remarks Elfman made during a July 2023 Rolling Stone interview. Elfman's denials of Abadi's allegations of repeated sexual harassment and misconduct were included in an investigative piece about a settlement he had previously made with his former mentee.
'Not once during the two-plus years since this defamation case was filed did Elfman so much as breathe the word arbitration,' Abadi's lawyers wrote in their pleadings. 'Instead, he substantially invoked the litigation machinery of this court to seek decisions on the merits.'
According to Abadi's attorneys, her single remaining claim for defamation does not fall within the narrow scope of the arbitration provision in the parties' 2018 settlement agreement. That provision, they argue, by its own terms covers only disputes related to the enforcement or interpretation of the accord — not an independent cause of action like defamation. The lawyers further state that Elfman himself has admitted the arbitration provision is 'narrow,' and that he would gain an unfair strategic advantage if allowed to take a position that directly contradicts one he earlier argued on the same issue.
The dispute has its roots in one of the more damaging chapters for the celebrated composer of 'The Nightmare Before Christmas' and countless Tim Burton films. The 2023 Rolling Stone investigation reported on a settlement Elfman reached with Abadi, and his denials in that piece became the basis of her defamation claim. Most of the original lawsuit has already been pared down, leaving the single defamation claim at the center of the current fight over venue.
If Judge Weinberger sides with Abadi at the October 23 hearing, the case will continue in open court rather than behind the closed doors of arbitration — a meaningful difference for a case that has played out largely in the public eye. Elfman's team has not publicly detailed its full argument for arbitration beyond the filing itself. The hearing will determine whether a clause written for a 2018 settlement can reach forward to cover statements made in a 2023 magazine interview, a question with implications for how carefully celebrities and their accusers draft the confidentiality provisions of settlements.