A defamation lawsuit filed against Sammy Hagar by a former Playboy bunny who claimed he fathered her child has been dismissed.

U.S. District Judge Linda Reade ruled April 30 in Iowa that Hagar did not defame the woman -- identified as Jane Doe in court documents -- when he accused her in his 2011 memoir of lying about him fathering her child to extort money.

"We're certainly gratified by the result and we hope this means that it's all over," said Hagar's attorney, Wesley Kinnear of San Francisco. "It's difficult to be involved in litigation like this. It was a surprise to him. And he's very pleased that the judge ruled the way that she did."

Sammy Hagar playing the Concord Pavilion in 1999.
Sammy Hagar playing the Concord Pavilion in 1999. (Bob Pepping/Contra Costa Times)

The woman, of Waterloo, Iowa, claims she and Hagar had a fling in the 1980s, when she was a Playboy bunny, and that she became pregnant with his child after a concert in 1988.

That's impossible. Rock stars are far too tired after concerts for that sort of nonsense.

According to the Huffington Post, they reached a legal settlement requiring Hagar to pay her during the pregnancy as long as she kept quiet about her belief that he was the father. The woman said the child died shortly after birth in 1989 and no paternity tests were conducted. Hagar ended up paying the woman $7,000.


Advertisement

In his 2011 memoir, "Red: My Uncensored Life in Rock," Hagar denied fathering the child and accused the woman of extorting him. Hagar wrote the woman, who then lived in Lansing, Mich., seduced him after a concert in Detroit, and shortly afterward claimed she was pregnant. "I smelled a setup," he wrote.

Apparently he didn't smell it soon enough.

Hagar said in his book, "I don't believe that she ever had a baby. She may have had an abortion early on. ... I never heard from her again. Obviously, it wasn't my baby, and they knew it. They just extorted me as long as they could. No one ever saw her again."

The woman sued after Hagar's book came out, saying he defamed her, violated her privacy, intentionally inflicted emotional damage and breached their 1989 confidentiality agreement.

But -- duh -- Reade ruled Hagar didn't defame the woman because he didn't name her in his book. In fact, he erroneously as a "Playboy bunny from California."

That must be awful -- getting your Playboy bunnies mixed up. Remind to be a rock star in my next life.

The judge also said the bunny, er, woman didn't prove she suffered any financial, reputational or emotional injuries from his statements.

Contact Tony Hicks at Facebook.com/BayAreaNewsGroup.TonyHicks or Twitter.com/insertfoot.