An ex-GMU law professor is suing his former students in a $108 million defamation case. His defense is similar to Johnny Depp's.

• Joshua Wright, a former law professor, resigned after students accused him of sexual misconduct.
• Wright then filed a defamation suit against the former students, seeking $108 million in damages.
• The strategy of filing a defamation suit after claims of abuse is similar to the Depp v. Heard case.

A former law school professor is turning to an increasingly popular legal defense strategy after multiple students accused him of using his position of power to pressure them into romantic and sexual relationships.

Joshua Wright, a former commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission and former professor of law at George Mason University, denies the allegations and has filed a defamation suit against two students who accused him of misconduct after they took their concerns to legal news outlet Law360.

He is seeking $108 million in damages, citing lost business and "humiliation, embarrassment, and mental anguish" caused by the accusations in a defensive maneuver legal experts told Insider has become the go-to playbook for people accused of abuse following high-profile cases like Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard and the countersuit of Donald Trump v. E. Jean Carroll. 

The accusations against Wright

Two of Wright's former students, Elyse Dorsey and Angela Landry, told Law360 they felt Wright abused his power as their professor and coerced them into romantic and sexual relationships with false promises of career advancement and opportunity in exchange for intimacy and companionship — and that professional opportunities were withheld from them when they refused his advances.

Dorsey told the outlet her relationship with Wright began in 2010 and lasted intermittently through 2021 and that the pair engaged in sexual activity only when she was in subordinate professional roles to him. Landry, who said her relationship with Wright began in 2010 and lasted intermittently through 2016, told Law360 that she, too, only had sexual contact with Wright when she was a student or employee of his.

Dorsey and Landry did not immediately respond to Insider's requests for comment but indicated to Law360 that they believed their relationships with Wright were part of a larger pattern of behavior involving "many" other women.

Wright vehemently denies the allegations. In a statement emailed to Insider, he said that "every relationship" he has ever been in "was 100% mutual and consensual."

"I am fully accountable for the decisions I made as an unfaithful husband," Wright's statement to Insider read, adding that he has learned from his mistakes and is remorseful to his ex-wife and family. "As an attorney, public servant, and academic, I have never let any relationship impair my professional duties."

Eight women total, including former students and colleagues of Wright's, have come forward with their own accounts of his misconduct, Bloomberg reported.

Following an "exhaustive" investigation by the university into Title IX allegations initially made against Wright two years ago by Dorsey and the publication of the Law360 article, he resigned from his position at George Mason University earlier this month.

The Title IX complaint, according to Law360, includes allegations consistent with Dorsey's claims to the outlet.

Representatives for George Mason University confirmed Wright is no longer employed at the school and declined to comment on specific personnel incidents. Still, they stated the school is "confident that when prohibited conduct in this matter was brought to our attention at the law school, we acted in accordance with applicable university policies. The law school is deeply concerned by the allegations, and we aspire to zero tolerance of such conduct." 

A 'vendetta' worth $108 million

"While I make no excuses for my personal shortcomings, I stand by my character and career, will always fight for the truth, and will vehemently defend myself against baseless lies spun as a scheme for personal financial gain and notoriety," Wright said in his statement to Insider.

In addition to resigning from George Mason University, Wright says in the lawsuit that he lost clients and contract work at his law firm. The financial losses, in addition to the emotional distress he alleges he has sustained, warrant the $108 million he's seeking from his accusers, Wright's complaint argues.

The complaint characterizes Dorsey and Landry as scorned former lovers who "have embarked on a vendetta to destroy his reputation, portray themselves as #metoo victims, and make a fortune in the process" by making their accusations public. 

Wright responds with the 'Depp Defense'

The legal strategy Wright has employed is part of an increasingly popular reliance on defamation claims to combat allegations of abuse and misconduct, three legal experts told Insider.

Examples can be seen in high-profile cases like Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard, the countersuit of Donald Trump v. E. Jean Carroll, the surviving families of Sandy Hook victims v. Alex Jones, and Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News.

"We are seeing more defamation cases. It was a claim that was seen as difficult to bring, but as lawyers experienced success, we see more lawyers willing to take the risk," Tracy A. Pearson, a legal analyst, told Insider, adding that lawyers frequently consider their odds of success when considering whether to take a case.

Wright's case is similar to Depp's in that the misconduct allegations were published through the media. Both Wright and Depp opted not to sue the publications for amplifying the accusations against them, and instead sued the women behind the claims.

Ultimately, Depp won $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages in his defamation case against Heard. In a countersuit alleging Depp's lawyer had defamed her, Heard was also awarded $2 million in compensatory damages.

Historically, lawyers have shied away from defamation cases because the legal standard of "actual malice," which is required to win a defamation complaint against a public figure, was regarded as a high threshold of proof, Tre Lovell, an attorney with the Lovell Firm, told Insider.

Additionally, some states have provisions that prevent retaliatory lawsuits from being filed, called Anti-SLAPP legislation. Virginia, where this case was submitted, has weak legal provisions in this area, as litigators and free speech watchdogs have noted, since the state law does not identify procedures to allow defendants to invoke the protections, and an anti-SLAPP defense can only be invoked at jury trial — not in pre-trial stages, as in other states.

And juries appear to be more receptive to ruling on behalf of defamation claimants, especially after big wins in cases like Depp's, Lovell told Insider. So, complainants like Wright may see defamation charges as a chance for a significant payout and an opportunity to share their side of the story.

"By showing he's going through the legal system and going after them for $108 million dollars, it makes a statement," Lovell said about Wright's legal strategy. "People are gonna take a second look at it, they're gonna read the complaint, they're gonna read his side."

Lovell added that reputation management is often a critical factor in defamation filings like Depp's and said Wright's maneuver to file a defamation suit is a similar attempt to "control the narrative" that Dorsey and Landry had shared about him.

Lindsay R. McKasson, an attorney from Binnall Law Group who is representing Wright, said in a statement to Insider that Wright "filed suit to set the record straight." 

"These cases are rarely about monetary damages and are more often a vehicle to repair a reputation," Pearson told Insider. "That was Johnny Depp's goal."

She added that "there is always a risk in bringing a defamation case that the person alleging defamation will further damage their reputation through litigation. Sometimes plaintiffs, in their desperation to clear their name, fail to recognize the bad facts. Johnny Depp's case was essentially a marital dispute. This case is different because there is a power difference between a student and professor."

Wright is seeking a jury trial. While it remains unclear if the case will reach that point, the women, now with successful law careers of their own, say they're no longer afraid of how Wright could influence their careers.

"I have so many thoughts about this lawsuit, many of which have been expressed by those who have been commenting on this today, so I won't repeat," Landry wrote on social media in response to Wright's defamation complaint being posted. "The one thing I'll say is that I refuse to be bullied into silence."

September 2, 2023: This article was updated with additional detail about Virginia's anti-SLAPP legislation.