Judge Orders Kennedy Center to Pay Chuck Redd $252,479, Center Plans Appeal

Q: Why was a jazz musician awarded over $252,000 after a major arts venue sued him for canceling a performance?

Chuck Redd was awarded more than $252,000 because the Kennedy Center lost its lawsuit against him, and the judge found he was entitled to recover his legal fees after defending against a case that should not have gone forward. D.C. Superior Court Judge Tanya Jones Bosier had already dismissed the Kennedy Center’s breach-of-contract claim, ruling that the venue failed to show there was a valid, legally binding contract for Redd’s planned Christmas Eve performance. The court noted that Redd never signed the agreement, so the center could not prove he breached it by withdrawing. The fee award also rested on the District of Columbia’s Anti-SLAPP law, which is designed to protect people from lawsuits aimed at punishing or discouraging speech on matters of public interest. Redd had publicly explained that he canceled because he objected to the Kennedy Center’s attempt to rename the building. The judge found that his public comments were protected and that the center’s lawsuit targeted that protected expression. That mattered because other artists also canceled after the renaming dispute, but Redd was singled out after speaking publicly. Under the Anti-SLAPP statute, a successful defendant can recover attorneys’ fees and costs. The final award was $252,479.70, slightly less than Redd requested. His lawyer called the lawsuit baseless, while the Kennedy Center said it plans to appeal.

Q: What hidden legal protections saved a performer from a retaliatory lawsuit after he publicly withdrew from a famous holiday concert?

The key protection was the District of Columbia’s Anti-SLAPP Act, backed by the judge’s separate finding that there was no enforceable contract to breach. Anti-SLAPP laws are designed to stop “strategic lawsuits against public participation” — cases filed to punish or deter someone for speaking publicly on an issue of public interest. Judge Tanya Jones Bosier found that Chuck Redd’s explanation for withdrawing from the Kennedy Center’s Christmas Eve concert was protected expressive activity because he publicly stated his opposition to the center’s renaming, a matter the court viewed as part of a broader public debate. That mattered because the Kennedy Center did not just claim he canceled; it pointed to his public comments as part of its case. The judge noted that other artists had also canceled, but Redd appeared to be the only one sued after making a public statement. That helped support the view that the suit functioned as a retaliatory SLAPP. Redd was also protected by a basic contract-law problem in the center’s case: he never signed the performance agreement. Without a legally binding contract, the breach-of-contract claim failed on the merits. Those two findings worked together. The lack of a signed contract defeated the lawsuit itself, and the Anti-SLAPP ruling triggered fee-shifting, which is why the court ordered the Kennedy Center to pay more than $252,000 in Redd’s legal fees and costs.

3 articles · Updated · The Guardian · Aug 12

$252,479.70 in legal fees and costs must be paid to Chuck Redd’s attorneys within 45 days under a Washington, D.C., court order issued Monday.
Judge Tanya Jones Bosier awarded the fees after dismissing the Kennedy Center’s lawsuit in June and ruling for Redd under the district’s anti-SLAPP law protecting speech from retaliatory litigation.
Redd had canceled a Christmas Eve concert after the Trump-controlled board voted to add Donald Trump’s name to the venue; then-president Richard Grenell had threatened a $1 million suit.
The Kennedy Center said it will appeal, adding to a broader legal setback after a federal judge in May ruled the board lacked authority to rename the institution and ordered Trump references removed.