Nirvana Win Nevermind Nude Baby Lawsuit After Judge Throws Out Case (Again)

Nothing can sink Nirvana.

On Friday, a California judge dismissed a child pornography lawsuit filed by Spencer Elden — who was photographed naked as a baby for the band’s 1991 album cover. Does not matter — once again because Elden didn’t file a lawsuit during the 10-year statute of limitations, Reuters reports.

“In short, because this is indisputable [Elden] did not file his complaint within 10 years after discovering a violation … the court concludes that his claim is untimely,” U.S. District Judge Fernando Olguin wrote in an eight-page decision issued by Rolling stone.

The list of defendants in Elden’s original August 2021 complaint included former Nirvana members Dave Grohl, Krist Novoselic and Chad Channing. Kurt Cobain’s widow, Courtney Love, and two other executors of his estate. Album cover photographer Kirk Weddle and art director Robert Fisher. and Geffen Records, Warner Records and Universal Music Group. According to legal precedent, Elden was seeking $150,000 in damages from each defendant.

In which three punk outsiders took over mainstream America, destroyed hair metal and defined a generation. Download it: Amazon iTunes

Spencer Elden on the cover of Nirvana’s ‘Nevermind’ album

This isn’t the first time Olgin has thrown Elden’s suit against the ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’ stars. The judge previously dismissed the case in January, but “with leave to amend” if Elden files another complaint to address the “defects” in the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Now, the judge has issued his final verdict on the matter. He added, “Because plaintiff has had an opportunity to address the deficiencies in his complaint regarding the statute of limitations, the court is convinced that it would be futile to give plaintiff a fourth opportunity to file an amended complaint.”

In his original filing, Elden alleged that the defendants “knowingly produced, possessed, and advertised commercial child pornography depicting Spencer, and knowingly received value in exchange for doing so.”

In return, Grohl’s lawyers. Novoselic; Weddle? Love; Cobain? Nirvana, LLC; MCA records? UMG Recordings, Inc. Universal Music Group, Inc. the David Geffen Company; and Geffen Records filed a motion to dismiss the case in December, per Variety.

They reportedly claimed that the statute of limitations had since expired and that Elden – who recreated the cover for the album’s 25th anniversary in 2016 – had “spent three decades cashing in on his celebrity as the self-styled ‘Nirvana Baby'”.

After the verdict, Bert Deixler, a lawyer for Nirvana, told Reuters, “We are pleased that this unfair case has been brought to a swift conclusion.”

Elden’s attorney and representatives for Nirvana and Dave Grohl did not immediately respond to EW’s request for comment on the court’s ruling.

Sign up Entertainment Weeklyfree daily newsletter to get breaking TV news, exclusive first looks, recaps, reviews, interviews with your favorite stars and more.

Related Content:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *