A woman named Michal is suing OneTaste. She prefers only her first name be available in her publicly filed lawsuit.
Michal (pronounced Mee-Hall) is seeking compensation for the alleged harm she claims she endured during her association with OneTaste Inc. from October 2014 to 2015. She was 29 when she worked for the company for less than a year.
Role in High-Profile Media Reports
After leaving OneTaste’s employ, Michal played a significant role in two high-profile media reports about OneTaste. The media, honoring her wishes, identified her only by her first name.
She was a primary source for a Bloomberg article, The Dark Side of the Orgasmic Meditation Company, published in June 2018, and again for a nine-part BBC podcast, The Orgasm Cult, which premiered in November 2020.
Michal told Bloomberg she “felt compelled” to marry a man because of OneTaste, which, along with having too much sex, caused her to have PTSD.
Bloomberg created this image of Michal’s wedding.
The BBC did not quote Michal’s “felt compelled” to marry claim.
Not Exactly Prostitution
Instead, Michal told the BBC she engaged in “not exactly prostitution…but…also not completely different,” by getting a man she was not sexually attracted to pay for her OneTaste courses and later marry her.
The BBC produced and aired nine episode podcast about OneTaste. Michal is featured prominently.
She blames OneTaste for giving her a “weird look” and making her eyes look “glassy,” and that OneTaste made her “disassociated,” which caused her to seek out sex with her future husband and others that she said she wanted then, but later realized that she did not.
Suing Three Individuals on Claims They Abused Michal
Michal is not only suing OneTaste Inc., but three individuals because she claims they harmed her during her 10-month association with OneTaste in 2014-2015. They are the former owner of OneTaste Inc., Nicole Daedone, and two employees, Rachel Cherwitz and Rachael Hemsi.
Nicole Daedone, former owner of OneTaste
Rachel Cherwitz, former head of sales for OneTaste
Rachael Hemsi, regional director of sales.
Allegations of Manipulation and Coercion
Michal claims that through “coercive and manipulative tactics,” OneTaste Inc, along with Daedone, Cherwitz and Hemsi, got her to perform “labor and services” because, she feared, if she did not, OneTaste would:
Reprimand her.
Humiliate her,
Tell secrets about her,
Fire her
Tell employees not to talk to her,
and she would lose the ability to make commissions from sales of OneTaste classes, which “would cause her a significant financial strain.”
In the lawsuit, Michal alleges she could not live “on the money she made selling OneTaste Courses.” She told Bloomberg that she made only $200 or $300 in commissions monthly. Still, she admitted that a OneTaste manager supplemented her commissions with a $900 monthly stipend.
Suing Current Owners Unrelated to Her Claims
In her lawsuit, Michal also sued the current OneTaste owners, Anjuli Ayer, Austin Ayer, and Amanda Dunham, who bought the company a year and a half after Michal quit working there.
Anjuli Ayer was one of three investors who bought OneTaste in 2017.
Legal Principles of Corporate Ownership and Liability
It is a fundamental legal principle that personal responsibility is linked to direct involvement and control and cannot be applied retroactively.
For instance, if a previous tenant committed a crime in an apartment before the present tenant moved in, police cannot hold the new tenant responsible.
Or if a person owns a used car that was involved in an accident a year-and-a-half before they ever drove it, the injured party cannot sue the present owner, even if they have more insurance than the original car’s driver.
Similarly, when new owners purchase a corporation, they are not personally liable for former owners or employees. A corporation is a separate legal entity from its owners, past and present. Shareholders, directors, and officers do not have personal liability for corporate actions, provided they do not engage in fraud or illegal activities.
In her lawsuit, Michal does not make any allegations that the current owners had anything to do with her alleged claims. Michal does not allege she ever met the new owners
The lack of legal standing to hold the new owners personally accountable for acts allegedly done by the corporation impacts the lawsuit’s monetary value in court.
If the current owners bought the shares of the company without an assumption of personal liability or guarantee for the past conduct of the company, (which no sane lawyer would ever advise anyone with assets to do) a motion for summary judgment under federal Rule 12(b)(6), will see a judge dismiss the case for failure of the complaint to state a claim on which relief can be legally granted.
Unethical Legal Tactics
So why is Michal suing the current owners of OneTaste?
Because the three current owners are wealthy, while the former owner and her two employees are not.
In practice, some civil attorneys urge unethical plaintiffs to sue wealthy defendants personally, even though they are legally unrelated to the cause of actions, in the hope that the lawsuit can cause reputational damage, which could cause the new owners to settle out of court.
Anonymous Accusations and Legal Scrutiny
This extralegal action is easier when the plaintiff can sue using only their first name and avoid scrutiny that could cause reputational damage to the accuser, not just the accused.
Despite her wishes, by law, Michal Neria, no middle initial, born January 4, 1986, does not enjoy anonymity any more than the women she accuses.
She does not enjoy the legal right for the civil court to call her a “victim” until she proves her case.
Until then, Michal Neria shall enjoy the same status as any other plaintiff — named fully, with her city and state of residence publicly known.
She will enjoy the same scrutiny she has called upon those she has accused, which is fitting for the adversarial arena known as civil litigation.
Let the record show that Michal Neria, of Kingston, New York, is a plaintiff suing three people with money for the alleged actions of three people without money. Let’s remember that as we examine Neria’s claims against OneTaste Inc. and six individuals in subsequent posts.
Michal Neria
