The woman suing Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler for alleged sexual abuse in the 1970s is challenging the singer’s latest attempt to have her case thrown out just weeks before it’s set to go to trial. In new court filings reviewed by Rolling Stone, plaintiff Julia Misley urged a California judge to reject Tyler’s motion for summary judgment, arguing it contains a “fatal” procedural flaw and ignores the broader scope of her allegations. Trial is currently scheduled to begin Oct. 1 in Inglewood, California.

Misley, who says she was 16 when she entered into a sexual relationship with Tyler, contends the rocker waited too long to assert a key defense - that Massachusetts law should apply because they lived together there during much of their relationship, and the age of consent in that state was 16. She claims Tyler waived that “choice of law” argument by failing to raise it in earlier responses to her complaint.

Her filing also states that public policy “doesn’t support rewarding someone who intentionally brought a child to a state with less protection” in order to avoid liability. She further argues that Tyler failed to properly cite the specific statutes of limitations in Oregon, Washington, and Massachusetts when addressing allegations of abuse that occurred outside California.

Tyler’s legal team disputes those claims. His attorney, David Long-Daniels, told Rolling Stone that the defense “hasn’t forfeited anything,” pointing to the fifth affirmative defense in Tyler’s April 2025 amended answer, which broadly claimed the suit was barred by “the applicable statute of limitations.”

In his motion for summary judgment, the 77-year-old musician argues that Misley, who is not a California resident, is improperly using California’s Child Victims Act to revive claims that, in his view, stem from a “consensual relationship” legally permitted under Massachusetts law. He also contends that if the court does not dismiss the case outright, it should at least limit the claims to alleged incidents in California, asserting that any potential claims tied to other states have expired.

Misley’s lawsuit, filed in December 2022, alleges Tyler first assaulted her in 1973 after meeting her backstage at a Portland, Oregon, concert. She says he later groomed her into a three-year relationship, obtained legal guardianship, and engaged in repeated sexual contact across several states. One of the most disturbing episodes described in the suit involves an alleged incident at the Beverly Hills Hotel, where Misley says Tyler dragged her naked onto an elevator for sex in a pool area while others looked on.

In deposition excerpts included in her latest filing, Misley said she was “treated like a sex toy” and “humiliated” during the relationship. Tyler has denied wrongdoing, describing their time together as a loving relationship and recounting some of the events, including the guardianship arrangement, in his 2011 memoir.

The case has already seen controversial defense arguments. In an earlier filing, Tyler claimed immunity as Misley’s caretaker or guardian, a position one legal expert described to Rolling Stone as “f*cking insane.” That defense has since been abandoned, and Misley says Tyler now claims he does not recall the guardianship.

Misley’s lawyers argue that her claims should be heard in full under California law, saying it would be “impossible” and legally unsound to split them into separate cases in four different jurisdictions. “The damages here are indivisible,” the filing states, adding that California has “great interest” in applying its laws to alleged sexual abuse committed by one of its residents.

Misley has previously spoken about the personal history that preceded her relationship with Tyler, describing a difficult home life, feeling “lost in a rock & roll culture,” and struggling after a 1975 apartment fire in Boston and an abortion. She left Tyler in 1977, later married, and became a mother of seven.

A hearing on Tyler’s dismissal motion is set for Aug. 28.