Ensing v. Sephora U.S.

• Decision Date: 27 November 2022
• Docket Number: 3:21-cv-00421
• Parties: AMANDA ENSING, Plaintiff, v. SEPHORA USA, INC., et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Tennessee

AMANDA ENSING, Plaintiff,
v.
SEPHORA USA, INC., et al., Defendants.

No. 3:21-cv-00421

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division

November 27, 2022

FRENSLEY, MAGISTRATE JUDGE

MEMORANDUM

WILLIAM L. CAMPBELL, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Pending before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Sephora USA, Inc. (“Sephora”) and Deborah Yeh (“Yeh”). Plaintiff filed a Response (Doc. No. 25), and Defendants filed a Reply (Doc. No. 29). For the reasons stated herein, the Motion will be GRANTED in part.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Amanda Ensing is a “beauty and lifestyle influencer” who shares creative content across several social media platforms. (Compl., Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 3, 16). Some of her content, which she shares to her more than one million followers, is sponsored by beauty and lifestyle companies. (Id. ¶ 16). Through such sponsorships, Plaintiff earned approximately $100,000 per month for her beauty vlogs. (Id.). One such sponsoring company is Sephora, with whom Plaintiff has collaborated at least three times. (Id.). Plaintiff alleges that the business relationship between herself and Sephora was a good one. (Id. ¶ 17).

On January 6, 2021, Plaintiff tweeted a picture of then-President Donald Trump with the caption “It will be Biblical.” (Id. ¶ 18). She followed this tweet with another, stating “There's not enough popcorn in the world for what's about to happen,” and later added “This is referring to the amount of corruption about to be revealed in our government. As usual, the left twists our words.”

1

(Id.). She posted additional tweets clarifying that her earlier posts were not intended to condone the violence that took place at the United States Capitol in Washington D.C. (Id. ¶ 20).

Shortly thereafter, RewardStyle, Inc. contacted Plaintiff on behalf of Sephora to propose that Plaintiff create a Sephora-focused, sponsored YouTube video.^[1] (Id. ¶ 21). On or about January 21, 2021, Plaintiff and Sephora contracted for the creation of the YouTube video. (Id. ¶ 22). Plaintiff received approval of the finished video from Sephora on January 28, 2021, and posted the video to her YouTube channel the following day. (Id. ¶¶ 24, 25). An unspecified number of individuals responded online by creating posts and comments which accused Plaintiff of spreading “hate and misinformation,” related her tweets on January 6, 2021. (Id. ¶ 26). Sephora responded to the wave of criticism on February 3, 2021, stating:

We were recently made aware of concerning behavior by Ms Ensing on her social media platforms. Most recently, she made light of the violence and tragic loss of life at our nation's Capital [sic] last month. For this reason, we made the decision to cease all programming with her indefinitely, including having the video she created through an external vendor, taken down

(Id. ¶ 28). Plaintiff alleges that these false statements were immediately repeated across social media, and as a result, she suffered intense criticism and backlash. (Id. ¶¶ 28, 29). Additionally, she alleges, the story was picked up by national media outlets, and other brands ceased collaborating with Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 29).

Plaintiff alleges additional defamatory statements made by Defendants, including a statement made by Sephora's Chief Marketing Officer Deborah Yeh. (Id. ¶ 35). Plaintiff alleges that Yeh sent an email to Sephora employees which stated that Sephora had terminated its relationship with Plaintiff because “she used her platform to share or highlight racially insensitive

2

and discriminatory language, and made light of the violence at our nation's Capital [sic] last month.” (Id. ¶ 35).

As a result of Sephora's comments, and the negative response, Plaintiff alleges that her beauty and lifestyle influencer career has been dismantled and her online accounts have been relentlessly attacked by third parties.

Plaintiff sued Sephora, Yeh, and John Does 1-1000, bringing claims for defamation, false light invasion...