Sam Smith & Normani Song-Theft Lawsuit Heads to Trial After Judge Refuses Dismissal

A judge says Sam Smith and Normani must face a jury trial over accusations that they stole key elements of their 2019 hit “Dancing With a Stranger” from an earlier track.

In a ruling Tuesday (Sept. 22), Judge Wesley L. Hsu refused to dismiss the long-running copyright case , which claims that the hit song ripped off a 2015 track of the same name by an artist named Jordan Vincent.

Smith and Normani say they never even heard the earlier song and that their track simply sounds similar by coincidence — a legal defense known as “independent creation.” But the judge said that it would require a full trial to decide that tricky copyright question.

“The court finds the question of independent creation should be left for the jury to decide,” Judge Hsu says in the ruling, obtained and first reported by Billboard .

The ruling sets the stage for a rare jury trial in a song-theft lawsuit over a major pop hit. Such cases are routinely filed, but are often settled before trial, like a blockbuster case against Taylor Swift over “Shake It Off,” or thrown out of court, like a lawsuit against Dua Lipa over “Levitating.”

Barring a settlement, Smith and Normani will now head for a must-watch courtroom showdown — calling to mind Ed Sheeran ‘s successful trial over claims he stole his “Thinking Out Loud,” or Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke ‘s losing effort to defeat accusations they ripped off “Blurred Lines.”

Neither side’s lawyers immediately responded to Billboard ‘s requests for comment.

Released in 2019, “Dancing with a Stranger” peaked at No. 7 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, making it one of Smith’s biggest hits and Normani’s peak spot on the chart. The song, released on Smith’s third studio album Love Goes , ultimately spent 45 weeks on the chart.

In March 2022, the stars were sued over the track by Jordan Vincent, Christopher Miranda and Rosco Banlaoi, who claimed that the 2019 hit song was “strikingly similar” to their own “Dancing” — and that it was “beyond any real doubt” that their song had been copied.

A year later, the case was tossed out by Judge Hsu, who ruled the two songs were not similar enough for it to rise to copyright infringement. But it was revived last year by a federal appeals court, which said the songs were at least close enough that Vincent, Miranda and Banlao could proceed with their lawsuit.

After more litigation, the accusers eventually conceded that there was no evidence that anyone involved in creating the hit ever heard the earlier song. That was a major setback, which meant they were legally required to prove Smith’s track was “strikingly similar” to their own — that is, so close that copying is the only logical explanation.

Smith and Normani argued Vincent, Miranda and Banlao could not do so and wanted the case thrown out. But in his ruling on Tuesday, Judge Hsu said a jury of their peers might disagree: “The two songs should be presented to a jury,” the judge wrote in his decision.

The stars had also argued that the case suffered from a separate “fatal defect”: that the earlier song actually sampled two earlier tracks without licenses, meaning its creators lacked copyrights to those portions. But in his ruling, Judge Hsu said Smith and Normani had failed to prove that argument.

“The samples are both difficult to identify or even hear within Plaintiff’s song due to their low volume,” the judge said. “As a result, the average audience could very well fail to recognize the appropriation of the sampled songs when listening to plaintiff’s song.”

In technical terms, the ruling denied a request from Smith and Normani for summary judgment, a ruling that ends a lawsuit without a trial. Following that decision, the judge will now schedule a jury trial in the months ahead to decide the case.

_Originally reported by [Billboard](https://www.billboard.com/pro/sam-smith-normani-trial-dancing-with-a-stranger-case/)._