Hollywood mogul Tyler Perry — one of the entertainment industry’s most successful filmmakers, creators, and producers — is facing a fresh legal storm. On December 25, 2025, an actor named Mario Rodriguez filed a civil lawsuit accusing Perry ofsexual assault, sexual battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, marking thesecond high‑profile lawsuit against the filmmaker this year. The complaint seeks at least $77 million in damages and has reignited intense public scrutiny of Perry’s conduct toward performers and employees in his orbit.

This investigation looks at the facts alleged in the new lawsuit, how it connects to prior legal claims against Perry, the responses from Perry’s legal team and industry observers, and the broader implications for Hollywood power dynamics and workplace safety.

The Second Lawsuit: Who, What, and Where

On Christmas Day 2025, Mario Rodriguez, a model and actor who appeared in Tyler Perry’s 2016 film Boo! A Madea Halloween, filed a lawsuit in California state court accusing Perry of repeated unwanted sexual advances and misconduct over several years.

Rodriguez’s complaint names Tyler Perry as well as Lionsgate Films, the distributor of Boo! A Madea Halloween, and alleges that Perry used his industry power and influence to initiate unwanted contact that escalated into incidents of .

According to the lawsuit, Perry — while discussing potential acting opportunities and later screening roles — allegedly made repeated advances toward Rodriguez in settings that included Perry’s Los Angeles home. The complaint describes various incidents over time, including claims that Perry:

Touched Rodriguez’s inner thigh and legs inappropriately while they watched a movie together,

Attempted to unbuckle Rodriguez’s pants in 2016,

Placed Rodriguez’s hand on his genitals in later encounters,

Gave Rodriguez money ($5,000 on multiple occasions) after some of these alleged interactions, purportedly as a way to “smooth things over” or keep him silent.

Rodriguez’s suit characterizes these actions as sexual assault and battery, as well as conduct that caused “significant emotional distress.” He is seeking at least $77 million in damages.

A Broader Legal Pattern: Second Lawsuit in 2025

Rodriguez’s lawsuit follows an earlier high‑profile lawsuit filed against Perry in une 2025 byactor Derek Dixon, who appeared in Perry’s television series The Oval and Ruthless. Dixon’s complaint, which sought $260 million, alleged that Perry had engaged in sexual harassment, assault, and retaliation over several years — accusing the filmmaker of leveraging his power to coerce or attempt to coerce a subordinate actor on his sets.

Dixon’s allegations were extensive, involving claims of unwanted advances, groping, threatening text messages, and coercive dynamics tied to career advancement. That suit has drawn attention because it highlighted alleged workplace pressure tactics — including claims that Perry influenced Dixon’s character’s storyline or career opportunities in response to sexual conduct.

Rodriguez’s lawsuit arrives only months later and involves overlapping legal counsel and similar themes of power imbalance, alleged misconduct, and emotional harm — though Rodriguez’s case is distinct, arising from his role earlier in Perry’s career and involving different alleged incidents.

Perry’s Response: Denying Allegations and Calling Lawsuits “Money Grabs”

Tyler Perry hasdenied the new allegations brought by Mario Rodriguez. His legal team, led by attorneyAlex Spiro, issued statements dismissing the lawsuit as financially motivated and without merit, calling it nothing but a $77 million money grab scam.”

In public comments, Perry’s lawyers have tied the second lawsuit to the first, framing both as attempts by the same legal counsel to extract large settlements — characterizing the claims as opportunistic rather than reflective of actual abuse.

Perry’s camp also points to Rodriguez’s continued contact with Perry long after the alleged incidents — including “cordial” communication — as evidence suggesting the relationships were not uniformly hostile, according to reporting that mentions text messages and context surrounding the interactions.

As of now, Perry has neither been criminally charged nor has the civil suit been adjudicated; both lawsuits remain pending matters in court.

Allegations in Detail: What the Lawsuit Claims

Rodriguez’s complaint outlines a specific pattern of recruitment and alleged misconduct:

Initial Contact and Audition – Rodriguez alleges that he was approached via a third party in 2014 and was told Perry wanted to meet him for a potential acting role. Eventually, Perry encouraged him to audition for Boo! A Madea Halloween.

First Incident (2016) – After appearing in the film, Rodriguez says he was invited to Perry’s home, where he claims Perry made inappropriate touching while the two watched a movie.

Subsequent Encounters (2016–2019) – The lawsuit claims repeated alleged incidents over the years, including attempts to remove clothing and placing Rodriguez’s hand on Perry’s genitals.

Financial Payments – Rodriguez claims Perry gave him money after some of the alleged encounters, which the plaintiff views not as gifts but as attempts to cover up or placate him.

Rodriguez also alleges that Lionsgate Films knew or should have known of Perry’s conduct and failed to act.

Legal experts note that such details — if backed by evidence — can be central in civil litigation, but they remain allegations until proven in court.

Legal and Cultural Context: Power, Access, and Exploitation

Civil lawsuits involving sexual assault and battery often hinge on power imbalances, credibility of witnesses, documentation, and corroborating testimony. High‑profile individuals like Perry — who hold substantial influence in casting, production, and industry networking — are sometimes accused of using that influence to create vulnerable dynamics for aspiring artists.

The fact that two separate men have filed lawsuits within months of each other naturally magnifies scrutiny and public debate about workplace conduct in Hollywood and entertainment sectors. Critics of Perry argue that the lawsuits reinforce concerns about unchecked power and alleged exploitation within the industry. Supporters of Perry emphasize the importance of due process and note that allegations alone do not determine legal guilt or civil liability.

Impact on Perry’s Career and Public Image

Tyler Perry is not only a filmmaker and actor; he is a brand with a media empire spanning film, television, stage, and publishing. For years, he has been one of the few Black Hollywood executives with substantial autonomy, creative control, and commercial success.

These lawsuits — particularly given their high dollar figures and public visibility — have put Perry’s reputation under significant strain. Industry insiders acknowledge that even without criminal charges, civil litigation can influence public perception, corporate partnerships, and future casting decisions.

Boards, studios, and collaborators often take reputational risk seriously, especially in the wake of broader cultural movements around abuse, consent, and workplace safety.

Voices and Legal Commentary

Observers note that plaintiffs in sexual assault lawsuits sometimes choose civil court precisely because of the lower burden of proof compared to criminal court, where evidence must meet a much higher standard. In civil cases, claims are evaluated on a “preponderance of the evidence” rather than “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Critics of Perry’s denials argue that dismissing serious allegations as “scams” can itself become controversial, as it may be perceived as diminishing the lived experiences of survivors. Supporters of Perry counter that without credible evidence or corroboration, labeling allegations as fact can be damaging and unfair.

Legal analysts emphasize that courts will ultimately decide whether the evidence supports compensation, punitive damages, or dismissal of claims.

Conclusion: Unresolved, Ongoing, and Under Scrutiny

As the second sexual assault lawsuit against Tyler Perry moves through the courts, several things are clear:

Mario Rodriguez’s lawsuit is distinct from, but legally adjacent to, the earlier lawsuit by Derek Dixon, creating cumulative legal pressure.

Perry’s legal defense continues to deny all allegations, characterizing the suits as financially motivated.

Neither lawsuit has been adjudicated, and no criminal charges have been filed in connection with these civil complaints.

The cases have sparked broader conversation about power, consent, and accountability within the entertainment industry.

Whether the lawsuits result in settlements, dismissals, or trials remains to be seen. But one thing is undeniable: a second civil complaint alleging sexual assault against one of Hollywood’s most influential figures has amplified legal scrutiny and public debate over how power and vulnerability intersect behind the scenes in entertainment.