LOS ANGELES (CNS) - A lawsuit filed on behalf of 10 young social media influencers alleging sexual battery, negligence and other claims against their former manager -- Tiffany Rockelle Smith, the mother of 16-year old YouTube personality Piper Rockelle -- should be dismissed, Smith's lawyers argue in new court papers.

The Los Angeles Superior Court complaint names as defendants Smith, her business Piper Rockelle Inc., and Hunter Hill, identified in the suit as the 20-something live-in boyfriend of the 42-year-old Smith and the primary director, editor and cinematographer of Piper Rockelle's content for her YouTube channel.

In court papers filed Wednesday with Judge Michael P. Linfield, defense attorneys maintain that the plaintiffs were helped rather than harmed by their association with the defendants.

"There is no doubt that plaintiffs took advantage of Piper and used her influence to grow their own media presence and YouTube channels," the defense lawyers maintain in their court papers.

According to the suit, however, the plaintiffs were never fully compensated for their work, despite the fact that their contributions, including the use of their names, images and likenesses on Piper's YouTube channel generated several hundred thousand dollars per month for the defendants.

The allegations in the amended suit originally filed in January 2022 include sexual battery, civil conspiracy, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of common law right of publicity, intentional interference with contractual relations and intentional interference with prospective economic advantage.

The suit seeks at least $2 million in compensatory damages, plus punitive damages.

"These kids have been taken advantage of financially and in some cases physically and sexually abused," plaintiffs' attorney Matthew S. Sarelson said in a previous statement. "This lawsuit seeks to remedy the egregious conduct of Piper's handlers. YouTube has created an enormous opportunity to create wealth, but there's always going to be people gaming the system to harm competitors. Our clients are just kids. They're good kids with big futures. A part of their childhood, a part of their innocence, has been stolen."

The suit alleges Smith inappropriately touched one female plaintiff often, including rubbing her exposed thighs and moving her hand toward her private parts and constantly spanking her buttocks.

Smith also once tried to spit in the same plaintiff's mouth and on her face when Smith was on top of her after the girl awoke morning, the suit alleges.

Smith many times boasted to the plaintiffs and others that she is the "Madam of YouTube" and a "Pimp of YouTube" and that she made child pornography, the suit states.

During a trip to a local post office with another plaintiff, Smith, after mailing several of her daughter's soiled training bras and panties to an unknown individual, said, "Old men like to smell this stuff," according to the complaint.

After their alleged experiences with Smith, the plaintiffs left to either focus on building their own YouTube channels, collaborating with each other or other individuals on video content, or exploring and honing other talents such as singing, dancing, social media influencing, entrepreneurship and acting, according to the suit.

But in their court papers, the defense attorneys maintain the plaintiffs' mothers had a concrete plan in place.

"Plaintiffs' mothers, the quintessential stage moms ... plotted to take down Piper and her family in order to increase their own children's social media presence by, among other things, publicly humiliating Piper and targeting her mother."

The plaintiffs' mothers' scheme "knew no bounds," according to the defense attorneys' court papers.

"Not only did they falsely accuse Smith of engaging in improper conduct with minors, but they coached and encouraged other witnesses to also make up stories that would cause the most embarrassment and make them cancel her -- which is exactly what happened because Google demonetized Piper's YouTube channel shortly after plaintiffs publicized their stories ...," the defense lawyers maintain in their court papers.

In a sworn declaration in support of the dismissal motion, Smith denied any wrongdoing.

"I did not expose plaintiffs to lewd or otherwise inappropriate conduct or acts at my home," Smith says, adding that she always emphasized transparency.

"On those occasions when filming occurred at my home, plaintiffs always had the consent of their parents and there were always other adults present, including plaintiffs' own parents, who were responsible for the supervision and care of their children," Smith says.

When Smith heard or saw bad behavior or discussion among the children, Smith told them to stop right away, she says.

Between 2018 and the time the plaintiffs stopped collaborating with Piper, Smith did not receive any complaints from the young influencers or their parents, Smith says.

Smith says she never dabbled in child pornography.

"I do not know how to embed a video on a porn site and I would never embed anyone's video or content on a porn site," Smith says. "I soon discovered that this was happening to Piper as well. I have no idea who embedded plaintiffs' or Piper's videos on porn sites."

Hearings on the defense dismissal motions are scheduled March 26 and 28.

KFI AM 640