Tyler Perry Faces $77 Million Suit From Madea Film Actor

Mario Rodriguez, identified in the complaint as the actor who played Frat Guy No. 10 in the 2016 comedy Boo! A Madea Halloween, filed a lawsuit on or about Dec. 25 or Dec. 26, 2025, seeking at least $77 million in damages and alleging a pattern of sexual misconduct by Tyler Perry. The complaint, which was widely reported on Dec. 27, 2025, accuses Perry of sexual assault, sexual battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress, and also names Lionsgate, the film’s distributor, alleging the studio turned a blind eye to the alleged conduct.

Rodriguez’s filing lays out a chronology that begins with initial contact in 2014. The complaint says a trainer at an Equinox gym in Los Angeles passed Rodriguez’s phone number to Perry, and that Perry later encouraged him to audition, reportedly telling Rodriguez, “I’m not a bad person to know and have in your corner.” Rodriguez alleges that after he was cast, encounters at Perry’s Los Angeles home and elsewhere included unwanted touching and coercive advances across a multi year span, with incidents cited in 2016, 2018 and 2019. The complaint recounts that at the final alleged encounter in April 2019 “it was clear that Mr. Perry would do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, to whomever he wanted no matter how many times he was rejected.”

The lawsuit arrives amid a broader wave of allegations that have shadowed Perry in 2025. In June an actor named Derek Dixon filed a separate suit alleging groping while working on Perry produced television series, a case that has since been moved from Los Angeles to federal court in Georgia. Rodriguez said he was motivated to come forward after learning of the Dixon allegations. Perry’s lawyer has publicly denied the claims and described the Rodriguez filing as a “failed money grab.”

Beyond the immediate legal battle, the suit raises questions about oversight, studio responsibility and the vulnerability of lower profile performers. By naming Lionsgate, Rodriguez is seeking to extend potential liability beyond an individual creator to a distributor that profited from the film. That strategy could prompt studios and distributors to reexamine vendor relationships, on set protocols and reporting mechanisms for misconduct, particularly where informal talent pipelines and personal introductions play a role in casting.

Culturally the case complicates Perry’s long cultivated image as a paternal figure and as a champion of Black storytelling. His work has been a major pipeline for Black actors and crews, and allegations of abuse strike at the trust many in the community placed in his leadership. The filing may also influence how emerging actors weigh opportunities that rely on personal networking and private auditions.

For the industry the claims emphasize that reputational risk remains significant, even for powerful creators whose businesses span studios, production facilities and streaming deals. Legal exposure, potential civil settlements and investor scrutiny could affect projects connected to Perry and any corporate partners. As the complaint moves through the courts, the case will test how entertainment companies balance support for creators who generate cultural capital against duties to protect those who work for them.