Ian Ziering claims brawling biker's civil case is attempted 'extortion'

Ryan ColemanFri, May 8, 2026 at 4:02 AM UTC

0

Ian Ziering in 2020 in Miami
Credit: Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty ImagesKey Points -

Ian Ziering is asking a judge to throw out several causes for action in a lawsuit against the star.

Ziering calls the emotional distress claim in the suit against him "completely frivolous in nature," amounting to "little more than attempted civil extortion."

The dispute arises from a physical altercation that broke out on New Year's Eve 2023.

Ian Ziering is standing up for his First Amendment rights.

The Beverly Hills, 90210alum is asking a judge to dismiss several causes for action from a lawsuit filed against Ziering, stemming from a 2023 altercation he had with a group of mini-bikers on the streets of Los Angeles.

According to documents filed with the Los Angeles County division of California Superior Court and reviewed by Entertainment Weekly, Ziering is invoking the state's Anti-SLAPP statute as a defense against the suit's claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and malicious prosecution. Ziering's new motion describes the lawsuit as "completely frivolous in nature," tantamount to "attempted civil extortion," and claims that Jacob Hernandez, the biker who brought the suit, "should be in jail."

Ian Ziering and his daughters
Credit: Ian Ziering/Instagram

The altercation between Ziering and Hernandez and his associates occurred on New Year's Eve in 2023. Per the documents, Ziering was stopped at an intersection in the Hollywood neighborhood of central Los Angeles with his 11-year-old daughter when they were "swarmed by members of an illegal minibike gang known as the 605 Gang."

Ziering was "attacked" by several members of the alleged gang after he exited the vehicle, he says. During the scuffle, one of the bikers smashed the windshield of Ziering's vehicle, which was seen in video of the altercation that circulated online at the time.

He spoke out about the altercation the following day, writing on social media, "This situation highlights a larger issue of hooliganism on our streets and the need for effective law enforcement responses to such behavior. As a citizen and a parent, I find it unacceptable that groups can freely engage in this kind of behavior, causing fear and chaos, while the response from authorities seems insufficient."

He ended the post by urging "city officials and law enforcement to take decisive action against such lawlessness and provide the necessary resources to prevent future occurrences."

Ziering made a police report following the altercation, and a few months later, the actor was "asked by the Los Angeles Police Department to review a photographic lineup to identify one of the individuals involved." Hernandez and one other alleged 605 member were ultimately arrested.

Advertisement

But Ziering is careful to note in his anti-SLAPP motion that his making a police report and reviewing a photographic lineup per LAPD's request constitute "the extent of my interaction with" with the force. He also points out that his subsequent social media post, and a follow-up post shared in June 2024, were the extent of his public commentary on the altercation — and neither identified Hernandez.

Still, Hernandez sued Ziering last year, alleging assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. It's that latter issue that Ziering's new motion targets, citing California's anti-SLAPP statute. An acronym for strategic lawsuits against public participation, anti-SLAPP laws seek to relieve individuals who believe they are being persecuted for exercising their constitutional right to free expression.

EW has reached out to Ziering's legal team for comment.

Get your daily dose of entertainment news, celebrity updates, and what to watch with our EW Dispatch newsletter.

"The Complaint seeks to hold Defendant Ian Ziering liable purely because Mr. Ziering's celebrity status and there is no basis for any liability," Wednesday's court documents claim.

While the new motion does not touch the assault or battery allegations, it vigorously defends the extent of Ziering's discussion of the altercation, both privately to LAPD, and publicly on social media.

"There are no facts in the Complaint that would support a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress of malicious prosecution," Ziering states in the filings. Further, these causes of action "indisputably arise from Mr. Ziering’s exercise of his constitutional right to free speech in connection with a matter of public interest and made before an official proceeding authorized by law."

Ziering is seeking these causes of action be dismissed from Hernandez's suit. Should the court rule in his favor, Ziering additionally seeks "recovery of attorney's fees" and other related costs.

on Entertainment Weekly

Original Article on Source

Source: “AOL Entertainment”