Jimmie Allen is facing another sexual assault lawsuit, this one filed by a woman who claims the country singer assaulted her in a Las Vegas hotel room and filmed them having sex without her knowledge or consent. In light of the second round of allegations, Rolling Stone can confirm that BBR Music Group, Allen’s label, has officially severed ties with the singer, who was previously under suspension. In a statement to RS, the label said, “BBR Music Group has dissolved its relationship with Jimmie Allen, he is no longer an active artist on its roster.”
The new lawsuit — obtained by Rolling Stone — was filed by an anonymous Jane Doe, who said the alleged assault occurred in July 2022, just a few months after she met Allen. According to Jane, she did consent to have sex with Allen during their encounter in a Las Vegas hotel room but claimed the singer denied her multiple requests to pull out and not ejaculate inside her, as she was not on birth control at the time.
Additionally, Jane said that after the alleged assault, she discovered that Allen had secretly recorded everything on a cell phone hidden in the closet. Jane said she took the phone with her when she left the hotel room and eventually handed it over to her local police department when she returned home. She also filed a police report with local authorities, who said they would report the incident to police in Las Vegas.
The new lawsuit comes one month after Allen’s former manager accused the musician of sexual battery, assault, and false imprisonment. Allen denied the claims and issued a statement apologizing to his wife but declined to mention the assault allegations. A rep for Allen did not immediately return Rolling Stone’s request for comment on the new lawsuit and accusation. (Following the first allegation, Allen was suspended by his label, management company, and PR firm; he was also dropped from the CMA Fest lineup.)
Elizabeth Fegen, the lawyer representing both of Allen’s accusers, said in a statement: “Since Jane Doe filed her case last month, we’ve heard from others who share similar experiences. Jane Doe 2’s filing demonstrates to me that there is a vivid, distinct pattern of behavior. We intend to show it’s a pattern of deceit, manipulation, and ultimately of force. The law is clear — anyone who has given consent in sexual activity has the right and the ability to revoke consent at any time. Just as no means no, stop means stop. If one participant doesn’t stop, it is sexual assault.”
According to Jane Doe 2, she met Allen on a flight from Sacramento, California, to Nashville in May 2022. The pair struck up a conversation, though Jane said she was unaware of Allen’s identity at the time. After the plane landed, Jane said Allen’s security guard (who is also named as a defendant in the suit, along with the company he worked for) approached her, explained who Allen was, and asked for her phone number. Jane and her friends met Allen “for a fun evening on the town” later that night, during which Allen said he was going on tour but asked Jane to “keep in touch with her.”
Jane said the two spoke and texted frequently over the next two months. Allen allegedly made increasingly romantic and devotional statements to Jane, saying he loved her and “wanted to have children together.” When Jane asked Allen about his wife, he said they were separated. (The couple only announced their separation publicly in April 2023.)
Eventually, Jane and Allen agreed to meet in Las Vegas. Jane said she insisted on booking her own plane ticket, which she did, while also requesting that Allen book her a separate hotel room, which he allegedly agreed to. During their time in Vegas together, Jane said Allen “introduced [her] as his girlfriend, and repeatedly expressed his desire to have a future with her and expressed that he wanted to have children with her.”
Eventually, per the lawsuit, Allen invited Jane to his hotel room, saying she could wait there while arrangements were made for her own room. After Allen’s security guard left the room, Jane said she and Allen sat on the balcony, where he again spoke about having a future together. The two kissed, and Allen asked Jane to join him in the bedroom. But first, he told her to wait, “to face and hold onto the balcony rail, and to keep her back to the door,” warning her “not to peek.”
“Plaintiff thought Allen was being romantic and would surprise her with champagne or rose petals,” the suit reads. “Plaintiff waited approximately five minutes with her back turned towards the door until Allen returned to the balcony. Plaintiff then willingly joined Allen in the bedroom. However, at no time did Allen disclose that he intended to or was video recording their sexual encounter, nor did he ask Plaintiff if she consented to him video recording their sexual encounter. There were also no visible signs of cameras or recording devices in the hotel suite.”
Additionally, Jane said at this point, she told Allen “she was not on birth control and repeatedly told him she did not want him to ejaculate inside her.” Allen allegedly “told her he would respect her request,” but as their encounter progressed, “Allen penetrated Plaintiff during sex with his penis and without a condom.”
The suit continues: “Allen told Plaintiff he wanted to get her pregnant. Plaintiff said no. Plaintiff told Allen to pull out before he ejaculated, again repeating that she was not on birth control, and she did not want to get pregnant. He refused. She repeatedly told him to pull out, but he did not and instead ejaculated inside her. After Allen ejaculated, he passed out on the bed.”
Jane said she got up to leave “immediately” after, determined to find a separate hotel room and purchase Plan B. As she was leaving the hotel room, Jane said she walked past the closet, where a light popped on, and in which she discovered “a cell phone focused on the bed, recording the scene.” The suit states Jane “had not consented to being recorded and did not know what [Allen] intended to do with the recording.”
While Jane said she took the phone, stopped the recording, and “hit delete,” she was unable to further access Allen’s phone without his passcode and “knew that the video would still exist in his deleted items folder.” Unable to wake up Allen and demand he delete the video, Jane said she took the phone in a panic. She called a friend, told her “she was trying to get away from a man,” and the friend helped her find a room in another hotel. Jane then said she booked a flight home, at which point she brought the phone to the police and filed her report.
According to the suit, Jane said she “has suffered and continues to suffer extreme emotional distress.” She’s seeking unspecified damages, suing Allen for assault, battery, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.