Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Were there any formal investigations into John Lasseter's behavior at Pixar?
Executive summary
Multiple news outlets reported that John Lasseter took a six‑month sabbatical in November 2017 after employees described “unwanted hugs” and other uncomfortable interactions; Disney later announced he would leave the company at the end of 2018 [1] [2]. Reporting shows both independent media investigations and at least one outside probe tied to his later hire at Skydance — but accounts differ on whether formal, internal legal complaints or settlements existed while he was at Disney [3] [4] [5].
1. Public allegations, a sabbatical and an apology
In November 2017, after multiple employees and a high‑profile writer’s departure from Toy Story 4 drew attention to his behavior, John Lasseter announced a six‑month leave, apologizing for “unwanted hugs” and other “missteps” that made colleagues feel uncomfortable [1] [6]. Major outlets including BBC and The New York Times framed the leave as a response to emerging allegations from current and former Pixar staffers who described hugging, kissing and comments about physical attributes [1] [3].
2. Media investigations documented patterns of alleged conduct
The Hollywood Reporter compiled anonymous testimony from multiple Pixar insiders alleging a pattern of behavior — beyond occasional hugs — including grabbing, unsolicited kisses and drinking at company events; that piece helped crystallize public scrutiny and is cited across subsequent accounts [3]. Several outlets referenced THR’s reporting when describing the scope of complaints leading up to Disney’s actions [7] [8].
3. Disney’s response: sabbatical, internal review and eventual exit
Disney placed Lasseter on leave in late 2017 and by June 2018 announced he would depart by year’s end after revelations about workplace conduct surfaced in the press [1] [2]. Coverage indicates Disney reviewed the situation internally while considering leadership transitions at Pixar and Walt Disney Animation, but available reporting emphasizes corporate personnel decisions rather than public civil suits tied to those internal reviews [9] [8].
4. Conflicting accounts about formal complaints and legal actions
Some reporting says there were no filed claims for sexual assault or formal settlements during Lasseter’s Disney tenure: Deadline quoted attorneys involved at Skydance saying Lasseter “had no prior claims of sexual assault filed against him, and no claims of sexual propositioning or harassment filed against him” [5]. By contrast, other outlets reported staffers’ accounts and suggested complaints had been raised internally or at least discussed among executives — but those outlets do not all document formal legal filings or settlements [3] [2]. ScreenRant, summarizing coverage at the time, noted “as of yet, there has been no word on any investigation into the Lasseter scandal,” reflecting uncertainty in the immediate aftermath [10].
5. Skydance’s outside investigation before hiring him
When David Ellison hired Lasseter at Skydance, Ellison said he had retained outside counsel to “thoroughly investigate the allegations” and “carefully evaluated the findings of this extensive investigation,” according to The New York Times; later reporting about Skydance’s town halls referenced attorneys presenting investigation findings to staff [4] [5]. Deadline reported those attorneys emphasized an absence of prior filed claims, while noting the investigation process Skydance used before onboarding him [5].
6. How journalists and commentators interpret the record
Opinion and news coverage diverged on the meaning of the available facts. Outlets like the Los Angeles Times and IndieWire described a long pattern of misogynistic or toxic behavior at Pixar that led to his ouster, framing the media exposés and staff accounts as substantively damaging even without public legal filings [11] [12]. Other reporting focused on corporate steps — leaves, internal consideration, an outside Skydance probe — and highlighted the lack of publicly disclosed lawsuits or settlements [5] [13].
7. What the available sources do not say
Available sources do not provide a public record of formal legal complaints or civil settlements at Disney naming Lasseter, nor do they produce a full, publicly released internal Disney investigation report detailing findings or disciplinary steps beyond his leave and eventual exit [5] [2]. Some outlets report conclusions from private due diligence at Skydance, but the underlying documents or comprehensive investigative reports have not been published in the materials cited here [4] [5].
8. Bottom line for readers
Reporting shows a clear sequence: employee allegations and anonymous accounts in the press, a Disney leave and corporate review, and Lasseter’s exit from Disney followed by an outside investigation tied to his new role at Skydance [3] [1] [4]. Whether those steps constituted formal legal investigations or produced public findings is disputed across pieces — Deadline and The New York Times report outside probes and attorneys’ summaries, while some coverage emphasizes the absence of publicly filed harassment claims during his Disney tenure [5] [4]. Readers should weigh both the substantive pattern described by multiple journalists and the limits of what has been publicly documented in legal records [3] [5].