|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by JENN WOOD
***
Last fall, an Aiken County, South Carolina jury delivered a stunning verdict: more than $45 million was awarded to Heather Crespo and Gabriel Crespo, victims of a hidden camera scheme orchestrated by Airbnb host Rhett C. Riviere. The panel found Riviere, his ex-wife Josee Riviere, and their business liable for privacy invasion, emotional distress, and unfair trade practices — damages that signaled a strong rebuke of both the conduct itself and the broader failure of Airbnb to safeguard its platform
That verdict represented one of the largest jury awards in South Carolina in recent years, underscoring how courts and juries are treating privacy violations in the digital rental era. But while the Crespos celebrated a measure of justice, Airbnb’s legal fights in South Carolina were far from over.
***
THE FOSTER CASE: AIRBNB’S ATTEMPT TO PUSH ARBITRATION
Parallel to the Crespo case, another South Carolina plaintiff — Julianne Foster — pursued claims involving Airbnb. In that matter, Airbnb attempted to move the dispute into private arbitration rather than open court.
Arbitration is a tool tech companies frequently invoke: it keeps disputes out of the public eye, avoids jury trials, and often limits discovery. But it only works if raised promptly. The S.C. court of appeals, in an August 20, 2025 unpublished opinion (.pdf), ruled Airbnb had waived that right by waiting too long and participating too heavily in litigation before filing its motion.
***
The appellate court found:
- Foster filed suit in April 2021. Airbnb said it intended to seek arbitration as early as May 2021, but waited until May 2023 to file.
- During that two-year gap, Airbnb fully engaged in litigation — filing answers, motions, and participating in depositions and discovery.
- By doing so, Airbnb acted inconsistently with arbitration rights, and under both state and U.S. Supreme Court precedent, a party waives arbitration when it unreasonably delays or games the system.
The appeals court also noted Airbnb’s procedural missteps in discovery further justified the trial court’s firm hand — rejecting Airbnb’s attempt to escape a prior discovery order. While the “rule to show cause” issue was ultimately deemed moot (no contempt order had been entered), the court emphasized discovery orders stand unless properly appealed – and courts won’t grant relief from orders a party simply ignores.
***
RELATED | SOUTH CAROLINA JURY AWARDS $45 MILLION IN AIRBNB VOYEURISM TRIAL
***
WHY IT MATTERS: LESSONS FOR AIRBNB AFTER THE CRESPO VERDICT
The Foster decision doesn’t overturn the $45 million Crespo verdict, but it does sharpen the legal landscape around how Airbnb defends itself in South Carolina courts. One of the most significant takeaways is that arbitration can no longer serve as a back door for the company. For years, Airbnb has relied on arbitration clauses buried in its user agreements to keep disputes out of the public eye and away from juries. But the Court of Appeals made clear that delay equals waiver. If a company engages in prolonged litigation — filing motions, taking depositions, and participating in discovery — it cannot later pivot back to arbitration. That’s a crucial development in cases like Crespo, where jury outrage can translate into massive awards.
The ruling also underscores the importance of discovery compliance. In Foster, Airbnb’s refusal to comply with a discovery order mirrored frustrations raised in the Crespo trial, where attorneys accused the company of withholding key information. The appellate court’s refusal to erase those sanctions sends a message that trial judges expect compliance, not obstruction, and that defendants who drag their feet may face consequences.
Finally, this decision highlights a broader shift: with arbitration doors narrowing, more Airbnb disputes are likely to play out in open courtrooms. That means plaintiffs will have stronger opportunities not only to recover damages but also to shine a light on systemic failures in how the platform polices safety and privacy. For victims, it strengthens their hand. For Airbnb, it heightens the risk of facing more large verdicts under the glare of public scrutiny.
***
A COMPANY AT A LEGAL CROSSROADS
Between the Crespos’ $45 million award and the appellate loss in Foster, Airbnb now faces a mounting credibility problem in South Carolina courts. Plaintiffs’ attorneys have learned they can keep cases in public courtrooms, where jury sympathy — not confidential arbitration — determines damages. That shift carries enormous consequences: higher litigation risk for Airbnb, the likelihood of more seven- and eight-figure verdicts, and greater public scrutiny of how the company handles safety and privacy.
The bottom line is clear: the Crespos’ historic victory put Airbnb on notice, and the Foster ruling reinforces that warning. Stall tactics and arbitration maneuvers will not shield the company in South Carolina. As more cases wind their way through the courts, Airbnb is learning that justice delayed may not just be justice denied — it may also be justice multiplied.
***
THE OPINION…
(S.C. Judicial Branch)
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR …
As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
