Former Vanderpump Rules star Ariana Madix has suffered a significant legal defeat in an ongoing revenge porn lawsuit filed against her by her former co-star, Rachel “Raquel” Leviss.

According to California Court of Appeal documents reviewed on Wednesday, the court formally rejected an appeal attempt by the 41-year-old Madix to have the civil lawsuit thrown out.

The landmark ruling ensures that Leviss’s high-profile legal action against Madix—which centers on claims of non-consensual distribution of explicit material, eavesdropping, and invasion of privacy—will proceed to trial.

The appellate court’s decision marks the latest chapter in a bitter legal and personal saga that first erupted more than three years ago following the exposure of “Scandoval”—the pop-culture-shaking affair between Leviss, 31, and Madix’s then-longtime boyfriend, Tom Sandoval, 43.

In addition to denying Madix’s request to dismiss the case, the court ruled that Leviss is entitled to recover her appellate court costs from Madix.

The Legal Arguments: Public Interest vs. Personal Privacy

The lawsuit stems from the moment Madix discovered the clandestine affair in early 2023. According to court filings, Leviss alleges that Madix nefariously acquired and distributed sexually explicit video recordings of her without her consent.

The explicit clips were taken from Sandoval’s personal smartphone.

Madix’s legal defense team previously submitted a formal declaration explaining that she accessed the videos on Sandoval’s phone using a passcode he had voluntarily shared with her during their relationship.

Madix maintained that she did not publicly distribute or broadcast the recordings; rather, she claimed she transmitted the clips solely to Leviss herself in order to confront her about the secret infidelity.

In an effort to have the lawsuit dismissed under California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statutes, Madix’s attorneys argued that her actions were protected under constitutional free speech guarantees:

The Defense Claim: Madix’s attorneys asserted that her conduct constituted a “constitutionally protected activity because her alleged conduct concerned an issue of public interest about an individual in the public eye,” citing the trio’s prominent roles on Bravo’s hit reality series.

However, attorneys representing Leviss successfully opposed the appeal.

They argued that claims involving the unauthorized recording and sharing of intimate media do not stem from protected free speech activities.

Leviss’s team maintained that she demonstrated a reasonable probability of prevailing on the merits of her claims under California law.

The California Court of Appeal ultimately sided with Leviss, stating in Wednesday’s official ruling that Madix failed to meet her legal burden:

“The court came to the conclusion that Madix did not meet the burden of

establishing that the claims alleged against her arose from constitutionally

protected activity. The order denying Madix’s special motion to strike is affirmed.”

Timeline of Events: From Bravo Drama to the Courtroom

The fallout from the affair dominated the 10th and 11th seasons of Vanderpump Rules, transforming the personal betrayal into one of the most widely covered pop-culture stories of recent years.

In her initial 2024 complaint, Leviss described herself as a “victim of the predatory and dishonest behavior of an older man” who recorded intimate encounters without her knowledge or consent.

She further alleged that the public exposure, intense online harassment, and subsequent villainization left her “a shell of her former self, with her career prospects stunted and her reputation in tatters.”

Following the initial fallout, Leviss stepped away from reality television entirely and checked herself into a voluntary mental health treatment facility, where she remained in inpatient care for three months.

Madix’s Public Response and Previous Declarations

While Madix has not yet issued a new public statement following Wednesday’s appellate ruling, she previously addressed the video allegations during an appearance on co-star Scheana Shay’s podcast in August 2023.

During the interview, Madix strongly denied keeping or sharing the explicit footage beyond confronting Leviss directly:

“I never showed or sent that video [to anyone else] and did not hold on to it for any reason,” Madix stated at the time. “That video was gone before I even called her on the phone. I saw about maybe five seconds of that… I wasn’t sitting there like opening popcorn.”

She added: “I know that people know about what’s in it. It’s very simple. I’m not going to get into the details, but there’s not a lot of details. It’s very straightforward.”

Despite Madix’s assertions that the footage was deleted immediately, the California appellate court’s affirmation means the case will now proceed through the pre-trial discovery phase, where both parties may be required to submit further evidence and testimonies regarding how the video was accessed and transmitted.