Diddy requirements to dismiss some of the statements in one particular of his sexual assault scenarios … claiming he will not be in a position to be sued beneath laws that did not even exist at the time of the alleged incident.

According to new docs, received by TMZ … Diddy’s lawyers are firing back once more at claims created by Joi Dickerson-Neal — a lady who submitted a go nicely with in opposition to him in November professing he drugged and sexually assaulted her back in 1991.

Joi submitted six will trigger of action towards Diddy … and, now his team’s proclaiming she can’t sue him for a quantity of of all these promises mostly since the guidelines failed to exist when she states he assaulted her.

For illustration, Dickerson-Neal’s suing Diddy beneath the New York Professional solutions for Victims of Human Trafficking Law … which Diddy’s lawyers observe was not in influence till lastly 2007 — about 16 a lengthy time quickly just after the incident took spot.

Diddy’s also contesting her statements beneath the New York Point out Revenge Porn Legislation, codified in 2019, the New York Town Victims of Gender-Inspired Violence Protection Regulation — handed in 2000 — and the 2016 NYC Revenge Porn Regulation.

Generally, Diddy’s attorneys are contacting for claims below these regulations to be dismissed with prejudice — even even though, of coaching course, they are also sustaining their shopper didn’t dedicate the alleged acts at all, which consists of the sexual assault she promises to have endured at his hands.

Actually worth noting … the legal specialists are not making the precise argument from the 1st two counts — popular law statements for assault and battery and intentional infliction of psychological distress that truly never count on specific statutes — merely since the arguments about the timing of specific statutes at present becoming passed truly never implement to these folks promises … which are at the heart of her case.

A single unique substantially additional difficulty Diddy’s legal specialists are raising … they say Joi can not sue Undesirable Boy Records or Terrible Boy Enjoyment like she’s hoping — ’cause folks, substantially also, failed to exist but either.