CAA co-founder Michael Ovitz left a deposition when questions shifted to Jeffrey Epstein. The move comes as actress Julia Ormond presses her Adult Survivors Act lawsuit alleging CAA helped enable a Harvey Weinstein assault, and her attorneys now seek contempt
Michael Ovitz didn’t just hesitate when the deposition questions turned to Jeffrey Epstein—he cut the session short.
During his recent deposition. the CAA co-founder refused to answer anything connected to Epstein after questions moved away from Harvey Weinstein and toward Ovitz’s own associations. He told the room, “I’m not going to discuss anything about Jeffrey Epstein. You can ask all the questions you want — you’re going to get no answers.” Then he declared he was “done with this” and stormed out of the building.
The deposition dispute is tied to a lawsuit brought by actress Julia Ormond in New York in 2023 under the Adult Survivors Act. Ormond sued CAA. Weinstein. Miramax. and Disney. alleging that CAA knew about Weinstein’s repeated sexual misconduct and sent her to a dinner meeting with him anyway. She said that meeting led to Weinstein sexually assaulting her in December 1995.
Ormond’s legal team eventually obtained a court order requiring Ovitz to appear for a deposition. But once the questioning shifted from Weinstein to Epstein, Ovitz declined to comply.
Now Ormond’s attorneys want Ovitz held in contempt and arrested to ensure the deposition’s completion.
The friction over what Ovitz will answer has also been fueled by material described as released in the “Epstein Files.” Those emails, released as part of that file set, are said to make it look like Ovitz and Epstein knew each other, including mention of them meeting up in St. Barts.
When the questions stayed on Weinstein, Ovitz was far more willing to speak. In the deposition. he described the disgraced film producer as a “bully.” He said he didn’t get along with Weinstein because he didn’t “like his methodology of business” and that they often butted heads. Ovitz also claimed he had no knowledge of sexual misconduct allegations against Weinstein until they were publicized in 2017.
Taken together, the deposition moment and the broader lawsuit timeline have left Ormond’s case in a new kind of standoff—one where a court-ordered appearance meets a hard refusal tied to Epstein, and the next step now being urged is contempt and arrest to force the questions to continue.
Michael Ovitz CAA Jeffrey Epstein deposition Julia Ormond Adult Survivors Act Harvey Weinstein Miramax Disney St. Barts Epstein Files
So he wouldn’t talk about Epstein but was fine talking about Weinstein? Sounds like pick and choose justice to me.
Wait I’m confused, was this deposition about Julia Ormond suing CAA or like… did Epstein just get thrown in randomly? Because it kinda sounds random but also not random.
Stormed out over questions about Epstein like that’s not the whole issue. Also “Epstein Files” email mention meeting in St. Barts… of course there’s emails. Hollywood connections always magically appear right when lawsuits start.
Honestly Adult Survivors Act stuff is messy. Like if the court ordered him to show up, he should just answer the questions. I get that Epstein is a different person but they’re all in the same circle right? Idk why he thought he could just refuse and leave, that’s not how depositions work.