Medieval Times Lawsuits, Former Queen’s Harassment Case, Union Fight and Horse Allegations

Medieval Times is not facing one lawsuit. It is involved in several separate legal disputes covering a former performer’s harassment claims, a union campaign and strike, a horse-related injury, animal-treatment allegations, website accessibility and copyright.

The most closely watched case is Kaitlyn Farrell v. Medieval Times, filed by a former performer who played the Queen at the Buena Park, California, castle. She alleges sexual harassment, gender discrimination, retaliation, cyberbullying and constructive discharge. One allegation stands out: that a supervisor told a subordinate to pull the stitching from her costumes to cause on-stage wardrobe malfunctions.

One point is easy to miss. On September 18, 2026, a federal judge sent Farrell’s case back to California state court. That was a ruling about which court hears the case, not about whether her allegations are true.

A Vanity Fair investigation published October 28, 2026, brought the wider workplace dispute back into the news. Its accounts come from former workers and different proceedings and are not all findings against the company. Medieval Times has denied wrongdoing in the cases where it has responded.

There is no single Medieval Times class action, no chain-wide settlement and no general customer or employee claim form. Each case involves different people, laws and courts.

Medieval Times Lawsuits: Quick Facts

Dispute	Main issue	Latest verified development
Kaitlyn Farrell v. Medieval Times	Sexual harassment, retaliation, constructive discharge	Federal judge remanded the case to Orange County Superior Court on September 18, 2026
NLRB union case, 22-CA-301865 and related matters	Alleged interference with and retaliation over union activity	February 2025 administrative law judge decision; company filed exceptions; case open before the Board
NLRB individual discipline case, 22-CA-351533	Alleged unlawful discipline and discharge	Board adopted the judge’s dismissal on March 12, 2026
Bill Hainsworth dispute	Performance injury, safety complaints, alleged retaliation	Reported to have moved to arbitration
Bethany Regan lawsuit	Alleged horse mistreatment and retaliation	Settled out of court in 2020; terms not public
Garcia v. Bowman	Horse trainer’s defamation claim against a former performer	Dismissed in April 2025, per later reporting
Mahlberg v. Medieval Times	Website accessibility under the ADA	May 19, 2026 order denied renewed default-judgment motion without prejudice
Watson Music Group v. Medieval Times	Copyright infringement	Complaint filed September 18, 2026

What Is the Kaitlyn Farrell Lawsuit Against Medieval Times?

Farrell began working at the Buena Park castle on May 31, 2019, and performed as the Queen. She filed her complaint on May 7, 2026, in Orange County Superior Court against Medieval Times U.S.A., Inc., Medieval Knights, LLC, Medieval Times Entertainment, Inc., Medieval Times California, Inc. and unnamed Doe defendants. She seeks damages including lost wages and emotional distress.

Everything in this section is an allegation. No court has ruled on it.

What Does Farrell Say Happened Before the Strike?

Farrell says she reported unwanted advances and inappropriate conduct by a horse trainer, and that another female employee reported the same trainer. She says she took part in the resulting investigation, after which the trainer turned hostile and placed her in physically risky situations around horses. In one incident, she says he brought a horse out late to throw off her timing and then verbally abused her shortly before she went on stage. She argues management did not protect her.

What Are the Online Harassment and Disneyland Allegations?

Buena Park employees voted to unionize with the American Guild of Variety Artists (AGVA) in November 2022 and went on strike on February 11, 2023. Farrell alleges that during this period she became the target of sexualized online harassment and doxxing by two anonymous social-media accounts. She says the accounts posted manipulated images, insults and personal information she had shared confidentially with management.

The complaint also describes an incident at Disneyland, where Farrell had separate entertainment work. She alleges several people associated with Medieval Times crowded her while she was on stage, that she feared for her safety, and that Disneyland removed her from the stage. No finding establishes who ran the accounts or that anyone at Disneyland acted for Medieval Times.

What Happened When Farrell Returned in November 2023?

The strike lasted about nine months. Farrell says that when she came back, she met with company representatives to report the conduct. She alleges company counsel rejected her complaints and treated some of the online activity as protected anti-union speech, and that the company said it would not discipline anyone over the posts.

What Is the Wardrobe-Sabotage Allegation?

Farrell alleges a supervisor told a subordinate to remove stitching from her Queen dresses to cause wardrobe malfunctions before live audiences. The complaint says the subordinate corroborated the instruction. It does not publicly establish how she learned of it or whether a malfunction actually happened during a show.

Why Does Farrell Claim Constructive Discharge?

Farrell alleges management cancelled her preferred evening shifts and limited her to an early matinee whose script condemned cyberbullying and malicious rumors. She says delivering those lines while her own complaints went unaddressed was humiliating, and that conditions became unbearable and she left in February 2024.

In employment law, constructive discharge means working conditions were so intolerable that a resignation is treated as an involuntary firing. Resigning from a difficult job does not establish it automatically.

What Is Medieval Times’ Response to the Farrell Lawsuit?

Medieval Times denies wrongdoing. Its answer says it took all reasonable steps to prevent discrimination and asks the court to dismiss the complaint with prejudice. No judge has decided whether the alleged harassment occurred, whether the company knew of it, whether its response was legally adequate, or whether Farrell was constructively discharged. Those questions will turn on evidence such as complaint and investigation records, communications with the trainer and managers, shift changes, social-media records, costume messages and witness testimony.

Related article: The Holdovers Copyright Infringement Lawsuit, Alexander Payne Sued Over Alleged Copying of Frisco

Why Did a Federal Judge Send the Farrell Case Back to California State Court?

Medieval Times U.S.A. removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on June 15, 2026 (No. 8:26-cv-01659-DOC-PVC), relying on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Diversity jurisdiction generally lets a federal court hear a state-law dispute when the parties are citizens of different states and more than $75,000 is at stake.

Farrell challenged the removal, arguing that Medieval Times California, Inc. was a real, connected defendant. She pointed to corporate filings showing similar business descriptions, the same California address, overlapping officers and directors, and property ownership tied to the Buena Park dinner show. The company described that entity as a non-operating property holder.

On September 18, 2026, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter ordered the case returned to Orange County Superior Court (Case No. 30-2026-01568545-CU-WT-WJC). He looked at whether the related companies operate as an integrated enterprise, weighing interrelated operations, common management, centralized control of labor relations and common ownership. He found enough intertwining to support Farrell’s allegations that the companies controlled her employment and benefited from her work.

Did Farrell Win Her Harassment Case on September 18?

No. The federal court did not decide whether harassment occurred or whether California law was violated. It decided it lacked jurisdiction. A remand is not a dismissal and does not mean the plaintiff has proved anything. As of October 30, 2026, this remand is the latest substantive ruling located, and no state-court merits ruling or trial date has been confirmed.

What Happened in the Medieval Times Union Campaign and Strike?

Workers at the Lyndhurst, New Jersey, and Buena Park castles organized with AGVA beginning in 2022. They wanted better pay, safer conditions, horse-care standards and a clearer response to misconduct complaints. Buena Park employees won their November 2022 election by nine votes. After unsuccessful bargaining, they struck on February 11, 2023, for about nine months. Former employees told Vanity Fair the company brought in performers from other castles to keep shows running, and some returning workers described hostility and changed duties. Those are accounts, not findings that every worker had the same experience.

The union never secured a collective bargaining agreement. AGVA withdrew after workers pursued decertification efforts.

What Did the NLRB Find Against Medieval Times in 2025?

The main labor case is Medieval Knights, LLC and Medieval Times U.S.A. Inc., No. 22-CA-301865 and related cases, brought on AGVA’s charges. On February 13, 2025, Administrative Law Judge Lauren Esposito found that the company committed certain unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act. The issues covered included the discipline and discharge of union supporter Christopher Lucas, the company’s lawsuit against the performers’ union over its name and logo, efforts to have union-related social-media content removed, statements about wage increases at nonunion castles, restrictions on handbilling, and subpoenas seeking information about protected union activity.

Is the NLRB Decision Final?

Not based on the latest docket located. Medieval Times filed exceptions on May 14, 2025, the General Counsel’s side filed an answering brief on August 28, 2025, and the case is listed as open. The judge’s ruling should not be described as a final Board decision.

How Is the March 2026 NLRB Dismissal Different?

That is a separate case, No. 22-CA-351533, over an individual employee’s alleged unlawful discipline and discharge. Administrative Law Judge Michael A. Rosas found on January 29, 2026, that the company had not committed the alleged violations. No exceptions were filed, and on March 12, 2026, the Board adopted the findings and dismissed the complaint.

The record is mixed: findings against the company in the broad union case, which it is challenging, and a final dismissal in the individual case. Reporting only one would mislead.

Why Did Medieval Times Sue Its Performers’ Union Over a Trademark?

In October 2022, Medieval Times U.S.A. and Medieval Times Entertainment sued Medieval Times Performers United and AGVA in federal court in New Jersey (No. 2:22-cv-06050), claiming the union’s name and logo could confuse customers. On September 28, 2023, U.S. District Judge William J. Martini dismissed the complaint with prejudice, finding the logo was not confusingly similar and that consumers were unlikely to mistake the union’s labor communications for the dinner-theater business. The company and union agreed to dismiss the appeal with prejudice in April 2024.

The NLRB’s 2025 decision separately considered the trademark suit as part of the union-related unfair labor practice allegations. They are related in history but different proceedings.

What Is the Bill Hainsworth Lawsuit Over a Horse-Related Injury?

Hainsworth performed for Medieval Times on and off for about 30 years. According to Vanity Fair’s description of his lawsuit, a horse panicked during a 2018 show and struck a wall at high speed, causing a severe leg injury that needed emergency surgery. By 2024 he had reportedly undergone two surgeries, had eight screws in his knee and used a cane.

His November 2024 lawsuit also alleged he was wrongfully terminated in January 2023 after reporting safety concerns and requesting accommodations for work injuries, claiming retaliation and failure to accommodate. Medieval Times denied wrongdoing, saying it had legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons and provided reasonable accommodations. The dispute moved to arbitration, per the October 28, 2026 Vanity Fair report, and no final award or settlement has been confirmed.

A horse accident alone does not decide the legal question, which is whether the employer properly handled reported hazards and accommodated an injured worker. If you believe you were fired for raising safety concerns, see AllAboutLawyer’s guide to Wrongful Termination.

Are the Medieval Times Horse Abuse Allegations Proven?

No blanket court finding establishes the horse-treatment allegations. The legal outcomes so far are different:

• Bethany Regan (2019 lawsuit). A former Buena Park cast member alleged the head horse trainer mistreated horses, citing unnecessary whipping, welts, dehydration, bleeding around the mouth and the death of a horse. She said she reported it to management and California workplace-safety authorities, and alleged she was suspended and then terminated in March 2018. The case settled out of court in 2020. Terms were not publicly established, and a settlement does not by itself mean the allegations were admitted.
• Franz Christian Garcia v. Jake Bowman (2023 defamation suit). After former performer Bowman posted a video of head trainer Garcia working with a horse, Garcia sued, arguing the video was misleading and the whip was a legitimate training tool. Garcia denied abusing horses. The case was dismissed in April 2025, per Vanity Fair. That dismissal does not establish that every allegation was true, and it is not a finding that Garcia abused animals.
• Former workers’ accounts (October 2026). Vanity Fair interviewed former performers and stable workers who described horse welts and injuries, aggressive training, long schedules, thin stable staffing and concerns about how management handled animal-care complaints. The report also noted that PETA had received welfare complaints. These are attributed accounts, not judicial findings of cruelty.

What Is the Raymond Mahlberg ADA Website Lawsuit?

Raymond T. Mahlberg, who is legally blind, sued in the Middle District of Florida (No. 6:25-cv-00456-GAP-LHP) on March 17, 2025. He alleges Medieval Times’ website did not work with screen-reading software when he tried to plan visits and buy tickets, and that the site and restaurants are places of public accommodation under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. He seeks a declaration, an injunction requiring accessibility fixes, ongoing maintenance, fees and costs.

The clerk entered default in June 2025 after the company did not respond. Default is not a final judgment. The court denied his first default-judgment request without prejudice on November 14, 2025. On May 19, 2026, Magistrate Judge Leslie Hoffman Price denied a renewed request without prejudice, finding the motion did not tie the allegations to the legal elements or support the requested injunction, and questioned the accessibility report and fee records. The order gave one final 21-day chance to file a properly supported motion and warned of a possible dismissal recommendation. No ADA judgment has been established, and the later docket status was not confirmed.

What Is the Watson Music Group Copyright Lawsuit Against Medieval Times?

On September 18, 2026, Watson Music Group, LLC, doing business as Quadrasound Music, sued Medieval Times U.S.A., Inc. for copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. § 501 in the Northern District of Texas (No. 3:26-cv-03169). The docket shows an exhibit screenshot and a certificate of registration, but does not establish the work at issue, the alleged use, the damages sought or any response. It is unrelated to the union’s trademark case and to Farrell’s employment claims.

What Did the October 2026 Vanity Fair Investigation Add?

Vanity Fair’s October 28, 2026 report, built around the phrase “knights will be knights,” places these disputes in one workplace picture. Former employees described low starting pay, two or three shows on busy weekends, heavy stable workloads, repeated injuries from riding and choreographed combat, and a culture that treated devotion to the fantasy as a reason to tolerate hard conditions. It says organizing began partly because performers wanted enforceable standards for safety, animal care and misconduct complaints.

It is useful context, but interviews are not evidence admitted in court, and it does not merge the cases into one lawsuit.

What Laws Apply to the Medieval Times Employment Disputes?

California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Prohibits employment discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation. Farrell’s case may raise whether the conduct created a hostile work environment, whether the company knew and responded reasonably, whether she was retaliated against, whether she was constructively discharged and which entities count as her employers. For background on these claims, see AllAboutLawyer’s guide to Workplace Harassment.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Also bars sex discrimination and harassment, but Farrell is litigating in state court on state-law claims and her pleaded causes of action have not been confirmed as Title VII claims.

National Labor Relations Act. Section 7 protects organizing and acting together on working conditions. Section 8(a)(1) bars interference, restraint or coercion, and Section 8(a)(3) bars discrimination meant to encourage or discourage union membership.

Workplace-safety and animal-welfare law. Reported hazards and injuries can raise state occupational-safety questions, and intentional animal mistreatment can implicate state cruelty statutes. None of the cases discussed establishes a safety violation or an animal-cruelty conviction.

Is There a Medieval Times Class Action or Settlement Claim Form?

No. Farrell’s case is an individual employment lawsuit, the NLRB matters are agency enforcement proceedings, and the Hainsworth, Regan, Mahlberg and copyright disputes are separate. No customer refund program, claims administrator, payout amount or deadline exists. Treat any offer of a payout for all Medieval Times customers or employees with suspicion and check it against actual court or settlement documents.

What Happens Next in the Medieval Times Lawsuits?

Case	What to watch
Farrell employment case	Proceedings in Orange County Superior Court after the remand
Broad NLRB union case	Board action on the company’s exceptions to the February 2025 decision
NLRB case 22-CA-351533	Closed; March 12, 2026 dismissal is the latest outcome
Hainsworth matter	Arbitration developments or a final resolution
Mahlberg ADA case	Whether a further motion followed the May 19, 2026 order
Watson Music copyright case	Medieval Times’ response and early scheduling orders

Farrell’s case will likely draw the most attention, but the broad labor case could matter more beyond Medieval Times, since it tests how employers may use litigation, social-media complaints, discipline and communications during an organizing drive.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Medieval Times Lawsuits

Is Medieval Times being sued in 2026?

Yes. It is involved in several separate proceedings, including the Farrell employment lawsuit, NLRB labor cases, an ADA website case and a copyright case.

What is the Medieval Times Queen lawsuit?

Former Buena Park performer Kaitlyn Farrell alleges sexual harassment, gender discrimination, retaliation, cyberbullying, doxxing and constructive discharge, including a claim that a supervisor ordered stitching removed from her costumes.

Did the Medieval Times Queen win her lawsuit?

No final judgment has been identified as of October 30, 2026. The September 18 federal remand decided jurisdiction, not whether her allegations are true.

Why did the lawsuit go back to state court?

Judge David O. Carter found enough interconnection among the company’s related entities to defeat the diversity jurisdiction used to move the case to federal court, so it returned to Orange County Superior Court.

Did Medieval Times violate federal labor law?

An NLRB administrative law judge found certain unfair labor practices in the broad union case in February 2025. The company filed exceptions and the case remains open. A separate individual-discipline case was dismissed by the Board in March 2026.

Did Medieval Times lose its trademark lawsuit against the union?

Yes. A federal judge dismissed it in September 2023, and the appeal was dismissed by agreement in April 2024.

Was there a Medieval Times horse abuse settlement?

Bethany Regan’s 2019 lawsuit over alleged horse mistreatment settled out of court in 2020. The terms were not publicly established.

Did a Medieval Times performer sue over a horse injury?

Yes. Bill Hainsworth sued in November 2024 over a serious 2018 injury and alleged retaliation and failure to accommodate. The dispute reportedly moved to arbitration, with no final award confirmed.

Are the horse-abuse allegations proven?

No blanket finding exists. Regan’s case settled, Garcia’s defamation case was dismissed, and former workers’ statements remain attributed allegations.

Can Medieval Times customers get compensation from these lawsuits?

No. There is no general refund or compensation program for customers.

Bottom Line: What the Medieval Times Lawsuits Show

The Medieval Times legal story is a set of separate disputes over harassment, union organizing, workplace safety, animal care, intellectual property and website accessibility. Farrell’s case is the most current, and the September 18 remand sends it back to California state court without deciding her allegations. The labor record is mixed, with findings against the company in the broad union case that it is contesting and a final dismissal in a separate individual case. Other disputes ended in settlement or dismissal.

The key for readers is to separate what courts have ruled from what plaintiffs, former workers and advocates allege. As of October 30, 2026, no single judgment or settlement resolves all of these disputes.

Sources

1. Farrell v. Medieval Times, September 18, 2026 remand order, C.D. Cal., No. 8:26-cv-01659-DOC-PVC, and docket.
2. The Independent, Medieval Times ‘Queen’ claims boss sabotaged costume to cause wardrobe malfunction in harassment suit, June 19, 2026.
3. Vanity Fair, “Knights Will Be Knights.” At Medieval Times, a Dinner-Theater Kingdom Faces a Reckoning, October 28, 2026.
4. NLRB, Case No. 22-CA-301865 and Administrative Law Judge Decision JD-10-25, February 13, 2025.
5. NLRB, Case No. 22-CA-351533 and Summary of Decisions, March 9 to 13, 2026.
6. Medieval Times U.S.A. v. Medieval Times Performers United, No. 2:22-cv-06050, September 28, 2023.
7. Bloomberg Law, Medieval Times Dismisses Trademark Appeal Against Labor Union, April 8, 2024.
8. Mahlberg v. Medieval Times U.S.A., Inc., No. 6:25-cv-00456, May 19, 2026 order.
9. Watson Music Group, LLC v. Medieval Times U.S.A., Inc., No. 3:26-cv-03169 (N.D. Tex.).
10. Blank Rome, Medieval Times NLRB individual retaliation case, February 5, 2026.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the federal remand order and dockets, NLRB case records and decisions, Vanity Fair and other reporting cited above, as of October 30, 2026. Last Updated: October 30, 2026.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws vary by state and individual circumstances differ. For advice about your specific situation, consult a qualified attorney. Allegations in active lawsuits and reports from former employees are not established facts unless proven, and the cases discussed have separate parties, claims and outcomes.