Rod Stewart, Sean Stewart

Jordan Strauss

A jury might still get to answer the question, Do ya think Rod Stewart's liable for his son's alleged misbehavior?

The British rocker and his hefty checkbook were unable to fully extricate themselves from an assault-and-battery lawsuit leveled at him and his boy Sean Stewart, despite not being at the scene two years ago when his 27-year-old son supposedly roughed up a fellow clubgoer.

A Los Angeles judge ruled Friday that the elder Stewart will remain a codefendant in the case, but the 63-year-old singer also dodged a financial bullet when Los Angeles Superior Court Judge John Shepard Wiley also determined that he will not have to pay punitive damages, if any are awarded.

Plaintiff Daniel Refoua sued Sean Stewart and two unnamed defendants last July, claiming that Sean and others "attacked, assaulted, battered, punched, beat, hit, struck, tortured and imprisoned" him outside the Hollywood nightclub LAX on Jan. 5, 2006, leaving him with a broken nose and related injuries.

Four months later, the John Does were identified as Rod Stewart and his bodyguard, James "Country" Davis.

In a rebuttal filing, Sean's attorney wrote that Refoua was the one who instigated the fight by drunkenly approaching the Son of Hollywood and slapping him on the back. The plaintiff then threatened the rock scion and attempted to hit him with a clenched fist.

Meanwhile, Rod's attorney tried to get his famous client off the docket in March, filing a motion stating that there were no grounds on which to include the "Forever Young" crooner in the suit.

"The complaint is silent as to how the incident arose, its setting, [Rod Stewart's] specific conduct, or anything else," the filing stated. "It is also strange that it took Refoua four months to amend his complaint to identify Rod Stewart as a defendant."

But because the Rock and Roll Hall of Famer will remain a defendant, his legal team now has 10 days to respond to Refoua's charges of assault, battery, false imprisonment, negligence and intention infliction of emotional distress.

The case is scheduled to go to trial Jan. 27 if no settlement is reached beforehand.

  • Share
  • Tweet
  • Share

We and our partners use cookies on this site to improve our service, perform analytics, personalize advertising, measure advertising performance, and remember website preferences. By using the site, you consent to these cookies. For more information on cookies including how to manage your consent visit our Cookie Policy.