Photo credit: Boston Lynn Schulz

Perry Farrell has responded to the lawsuit against him filed by Jane’s Addiction. Jane’s Addiction’s Dave Navarro had recently accused Farrell of alleged assault and alleged battery for an onstage scuffle during the band’s reunion tour. Farrell has denied the allegations. 

All four original members of the rock band Jane’s Addiction have gotten entangled in lawsuits against each other, seeking around $10 million in damages following an alleged physical altercation during a live performance in September 2024.

Metalinjection reports that the trio filed suit back in July, accusing Farrell of alleged intentional infliction of emotional distress, alleged negligence, alleged breach of fiduciary duty and alleged breach of contract. Navarro added claims of alleged assault and alleged battery over the September 13, 2024 incident in Boston, when Farrell appeared to shoulder-bump and then allegedly take a swing at him mid-show. The legal filing claims that Farrell allegedly attacked Navarro onstage during a North American concert, which soon spiraled out of control and led to the cancellation of a significant portion of the band’s tour, as well as allegedly caused the band to shelve plans for a new studio album. 

According to Loudwire, in a new document filed on September 8th, Farrell “denies each and every allegation in the complaint” and denies that Navarro “has been damaged in any way or in any amount whatsoever.”

The singer claimed that Navarro’s suit “failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action” and added that the guitarist has “unclean hands” regarding their divide. Farrell says he acted in “good faith and without malice” toward the guitarist and is seeking a dismissal of the suit.

Navarro’s attorney, Christopher Frost, shared in a statement to People, “The lawsuit speaks for itself. So does the video. By responding in this way, Mr. Farrell is not taking any formal legal step to stop the litigation. This is consistent with the fact that they have taken no affirmative steps to advance their claims, whether serving discovery or otherwise, and it is consistent with the strength of the claims by Dave, Eric [Avery] and Stephen [Perkins].”