Crispin Glover Faces New Legal Battle Over Alleged Abuse Claims

A lawsuit filed in California accuses the former “Back to the Future” actor of battery, fraud and other serious offenses. The complaint comes from an unnamed woman who says she was lured to the U.S. by promises of a job and housing, only to find herself in a hostile environment where she alleges Glover tracked her movements and demanded that she serve as his live‑in partner under threatening conditions. She now seeks a jury trial and various damages, including compensation for emotional distress and legal costs.

The case claims that the two first connected online in 2015, with Glover allegedly pressuring her to relocate to Los Angeles. An encounter in Germany in 2023 is cited as evidence of his willingness to share questionable personal items. After the move, the plaintiff reports that she was forced into living with Glover, endured bizarre requests and physical harm when she tried to leave. The complaint also states that he evicted her abruptly, leaving her without a place to stay and with pets still inside the home.

Glover’s legal team strongly denies these allegations, calling them “baseless.” They argue that a separate incident in March 2024 involved the plaintiff assaulting Glover, after which he obtained a restraining order. The defense claims that the court’s dismissal of his earlier restraining request was due to a failure to appear, not because the order lacked merit. They assert that the current lawsuit is a fabricated attempt to damage his reputation.

The plaintiff says she suffers ongoing mental and physical pain, citing visible injuries and a loss of self‑esteem. She argues that the alleged wrongful eviction left her homeless and traumatized. Her lawsuit also references the Tom Bane Civil Rights Act, suggesting that Glover’s actions violated her constitutional rights. The case will test the court’s ability to balance conflicting claims of abuse and retaliation.

Both sides present starkly different narratives: one portrays Glover as a victim of assault, while the other depicts him as an abusive figure who coerced and harmed a vulnerable individual. The outcome will hinge on evidence regarding the alleged tracking, physical injury, and the legitimacy of the restraining order. As the legal process unfolds, observers will watch closely how claims of personal misconduct intersect with allegations of abuse and retaliation in the entertainment industry.