Two lawyers representing YouTuber Jack Doherty have asked a California judge for permission to withdraw from a civil assault lawsuit. The request comes after a judge allowed the case, including a potential claim for punitive damages, to proceed towards trial.
YouTuber Jack Doherty’s lawyers have asked to withdraw from his defence in a California civil assault lawsuit brought by Chase Cameron Gardella, who alleges that Doherty directed his bodyguard, Justin “Kane Kongg” Goslee, to attack him outside a Halloween party in Sherman Oaks in October 2023. A hearing on the lawyers’ request is scheduled for 23 November 2026, while the civil trial is now listed for 29 March 2027.
Why Are Jack Doherty’s Lawyers Seeking to Withdraw?
Attorneys Courtney M. Serrato and Olivia Zorayan filed papers on 13 October 2026 seeking permission from Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael R. Amerian to end their representation of Doherty.
According to MyNewsLA’s report published on 15 October, the lawyers offered the following explanation:
“Professional consideration requires termination of the representation.”
The report provided no further explanation for the request.
This is an important distinction. Although the lawyers have asked to withdraw, the request does not establish that they have fallen out with Doherty, that legal fees have gone unpaid or that they believe their client’s defence is untenable.
There is currently insufficient publicly reported evidence to support any of those conclusions.
The request also does not mean that Doherty has lost the case or that the lawsuit has been dismissed.
What Is the Assault Lawsuit About?
The civil action stems from an incident outside a Halloween party in Sherman Oaks, California, on 28 and 29 October 2023.
Chase Cameron Gardella alleges that he was speaking with Doherty and his bodyguard, Justin Goslee, when a confrontation developed.
According to the complaint, Doherty encouraged a fight involving Gardella and a friend before Goslee punched Gardella in the face.
Gardella alleges that the blow caused him to fall and sustain injuries to his head, face and neck.
The lawsuit further alleges that Doherty live-streamed the incident on Kick and subsequently circulated recordings on social media.
Gardella’s legal team argues that the alleged violence was connected to Doherty’s online content business, claiming that confrontations could generate views, attention and revenue.
These are allegations advanced by the claimant, not findings that Doherty directed the attack.
The lawsuit, filed in February 2024, names Doherty, associated business entities and Goslee among the defendants.
Its claims include assault, battery, negligence, negligent hiring and supervision, aiding and abetting, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
What Has Jack Doherty Said in His Defence?
Doherty has contested the allegation that he instructed his bodyguard to attack Gardella.
In earlier court filings, his lawyers argued that Goslee acted independently and outside the scope of his duties as a security contractor.
Doherty’s defence maintains that he did not throw the punch and should not be held legally responsible for Goslee’s actions.
His legal team has also challenged the basis for punitive damages.
These competing accounts are central to the case. The civil proceedings will consider whether Doherty bears legal responsibility for the alleged assault and any resulting harm.
Judge Previously Allowed the Assault Case to Proceed
The latest development follows a significant ruling in April 2026.
Judge Michael R. Amerian rejected Doherty’s attempt to obtain judgment in his favour before trial.
In a decision reported by MyNewsLA on 13 April, the judge found that there were issues requiring determination at trial.
The ruling allowed Gardella’s claims to proceed and preserved his ability to seek punitive damages.
Punitive damages are additional damages that can be awarded in certain circumstances to punish and deter particularly serious misconduct, beyond compensating someone for their losses.
However, allowing a claimant to pursue punitive damages is not the same as deciding that such damages should be awarded.
No final determination of Doherty’s liability was made in that ruling.
Court Also Granted Access to Financial Information
Another development came on 29 June 2026, when Judge Amerian approved a request giving Gardella limited access to Doherty’s financial information before trial.
The order covered financial records dating from 28 October 2022 onwards.
Gardella’s legal team argued that information about Doherty’s finances was relevant to its claim for punitive damages.
Doherty’s lawyers opposed the request, arguing that it was excessively intrusive and amounted to an unjustified search through his financial affairs.
Nevertheless, the judge granted the request, as reported by MyNewsLA on 30 June.
The decision did not determine the amount of any damages, nor did it establish liability.
It did, however, permit an additional area of pretrial investigation in a case where the financial consequences could become significant if the claimant ultimately succeeds.
Timeline: Jack Doherty Assault Lawsuit
- 28–29 October 2023: The incident at the centre of the lawsuit allegedly occurs outside a Halloween party in Sherman Oaks, California.
- 21 February 2024: Chase Cameron Gardella files his civil lawsuit.
- April 2026: Judge Amerian rejects Doherty’s attempt to end the claims before trial and permits the punitive damages claim to continue.
- 29 June 2026: The court grants limited access to Doherty’s financial information.
- 13 October 2026: Attorneys Courtney M. Serrato and Olivia Zorayan file their request to withdraw.
- 23 November 2026: Scheduled hearing on the attorneys’ withdrawal request.
- 29 March 2027: Currently reported trial date.
What Happens if the Judge Allows the Lawyers to Withdraw?
Under California Rule of Court 3.1362, attorneys seeking to withdraw from a civil case must follow a formal process, including notifying their client and the other parties.
The court must decide whether to grant the request.
California’s professional conduct rules also require lawyers ending their representation to take reasonable steps to protect their client’s interests.
If the judge approves the withdrawal, Doherty could appoint replacement lawyers. Depending on the circumstances, he could also represent himself in his individual capacity, although companies involved in the litigation are subject to separate legal representation requirements.
A withdrawal would not automatically cancel the lawsuit or postpone the trial.
Equally, the request alone does not indicate whether a postponement will be sought or granted.
Why This Case Matters Beyond Jack Doherty
The dispute raises a wider question about the responsibility of online content creators for the actions of people they employ or engage.
Gardella’s lawsuit seeks to hold Doherty legally accountable for an alleged assault carried out by another person, arguing that Doherty encouraged the confrontation as part of his content.
Doherty’s defence disputes that connection and maintains that Goslee acted independently.
The case therefore involves more than the identity of the person who delivered the alleged blow. It also concerns the circumstances surrounding the confrontation and whether legal responsibility could extend to the individual employing or directing security personnel.
The evidence and applicable law, rather than Doherty’s online reputation, will determine the outcome.
What Happens Next?
The next reported court date is 23 November 2026, when Judge Amerian is scheduled to consider the lawyers’ request to withdraw.
The civil trial is currently listed for 29 March 2027. Earlier reporting had identified a November 2026 trial date, but the latest report gives the later date.
The outcome of the withdrawal hearing, any replacement legal representation and further pretrial decisions will be important developments to monitor.
For now, the position is clear: Doherty’s attorneys have requested permission to leave the case, but the lawsuit remains ongoing and the allegations against him have not been finally determined.
Fish4News will continue to monitor the proceedings and report confirmed developments.
Sources
- MyNewsLA: Jack Doherty Attorneys Request OK To End Representation (15 October 2026)
- MyNewsLA: Judge Clears Trial for Assault and Battery Lawsuit (13 April 2026)
- MyNewsLA: Judge Approves Limited Access to Financial Information (30 June 2026)
- Judicial Council of California: Rule 3.1362, Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel
