David Neuman lawyers: Accuser’s 2003 testimony contradicts allegations

Attorneys for David Neuman, the former president of Walt Disney Television, have filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit from Michael Egan, the man who accused Neuman and three others of sexually abusing him as a teenager.

In a motion filed Thursday, Neuman’s attorneys said that Egan swore under oath in a previous case that Neuman “did not engage in any of the acts” Egan alleged in his complaint filed last month.

In the complaint filed in a United States District Court in Hawaii, Egan said Neuman was among the adult men who sexually abused him in the late 1990s at estates in Hawaii and in Encino. According to the motion filed by Neuman’s attorneys, Egan testified in 2003 that Neuman did not sexually abuse him.

“David Neuman has never been present when I was involved in any type of sexual conduct, never harassed me, never made sexually suggestive remarks to me, and never acted improperly around me or toward me,” Egan said in a 2003 under-oath declaration included with the new motion.

Jeff Herman, Egan’s attorney, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

In 2000, Egan and two co-plaintiffs sued Marc Collins-Rector, Chad Shackley and Brock Pierce, who were co-founders of a company called Digital Entertainment Network, where Neuman was an executive. Egan and the other plaintiffs won a $4.5-million judgment in that sexual abuse case.

In four separate complaints filed in April, Egan said that he was abused by Hollywood power players Neuman, Garth Ancier, Gary Goddard and “X-Men” director Bryan Singer. All four have categorically denied the claims and said they were never in Hawaii with Egan.

Egan was able to file those suits in Hawaii because of a 2012 law that extended the statute of limitations for bringing forward allegations of child sex abuse.

Neuman’s motion also includes six sworn declarations from individuals who say that Neuman was never in Hawaii with Egan.

Neuman’s attorneys said in the motion that Herman and Egan are using the Hawaii law “as the vehicle to publicly defame and embarrass a California resident (Mr. Neuman), in the hope that Mr. Neuman, rather than fight these blatantly false and frivolous claims, will simply pay the Plaintiff to go away.”