In a recent ruling, federal judges dismissed three lawsuits that accused bestselling author Neil Gaiman of sexual assault stemming from incidents involving his children's nanny, Scarlett Pavlovich, in New Zealand four years prior. The claims made by Pavlovich encompassed serious allegations, suggesting that Gaiman had committed multiple sexual assaults during her employment with the family. She initially filed the lawsuits in Wisconsin, Massachusetts, and New York in February 2025. However, complications arose regarding jurisdiction, particularly as Gaiman and his wife, Amanda Palmer, reside in different states.

In the course of legal proceedings, Pavlovich withdrew her lawsuit against Palmer, acknowledging confusion regarding the appropriate jurisdiction after Palmer's relocation from New York. This led to a dismissal of the New York lawsuit by US district judge Mary Kay Vyskocil. Eventually, she also dropped parts of the Wisconsin suit against Palmer, clarifying the contractual and jurisdictional entanglements encountered during her pursuit of legal recourse against Gaiman. While these dismissals signify a setback for Pavlovich, they also highlight the complex nature of legal claims across different jurisdictions.

This case brings to the forefront issues surrounding allegations of sexual misconduct, especially involving high-profile individuals. It raises critical questions about the legal processes available for those who feel wronged, the impact of location on jurisdiction, and the overall ramifications on careers and reputations when allegations arise. As it stands, Gaiman's legal troubles seem to be alleviating, but the underlying issues related to accusations of a sensitive nature persist in public discourse and might require broader consideration of protective measures for alleged victims in similar situations.