A fashion photographer — who was slapped with a $1.1 million lawsuit in January by the Empire State Building’s owners for posing a topless model at the world-famous skyscraper — says the case has done more damage to his good name than his X-rated stunt did to tarnish the tourist attraction’s reputation.
Shutterbug Allen Henson filed a $5 million countersuit Wednesday. The Manhattan Supreme Court filing says nudity is not the skyscraper’s problem — claiming that the 86th-floor outdoor observatory is a magnet for suicidal jumpers.
Henson insists his August 2013 stunt was “lawful” and “peaceful” compared to the 30 suicide attempts he claims have occurred on the deck.
Henson, a fashion photographer known for his “boobs around town” project, accuses the owners of the 103-floor skyscraper at 34th Street of casting him “in a false light as a person who has violated terms of a license, created a public disturbance, and has violated the law,” according to court papers.
The Iraq War vet says he is a “professional photographer for hire” who also “engages in photography as a creative and expressive outlet.”
He “believes, as do countless artists and creative people, that iconic structures such as ESB inspire creativity, expression and activities protected by the First Amendment,” his countersuit says.
“The public enjoys and demands creative works inspired by, or including, iconic structures such as ESB.”
The countersuit adds that the law protects artists’ rights to photograph public buildings.
The office building’s January suit said Henson engaged in “forbidden behavior” by snapping shots of a topless, buxom brunette stunner throwing her hair back next to seemingly oblivious tourists peering through viewfinders.
“At the time that [Henson] and the model entered the observatory, it was crowded with visitors, including children,” the iconic tower’s attorney Jessica Eyland huffs in the suit.
Henson counters that building officials never protested at the time of the shoot and the photographer and model “left voluntarily.”
He admits that admission tickets bar “objectionable conduct,” but says the term is not defined.
In the initial suit, the skyscraper’s attorneys argued, “In order to continue to attract visitors, including families, to the building and the observatory, and assure their well-being, ESB has to maintain both the image and the fact that the building and the observatory are safe, secure and appropriate places for families and tourists.”
The countersuit comes just a day after a Muslim family from Long Island slapped the ESB with a scathing $5 million federal lawsuit, claiming they were booted from the observation deck for praying.
A spokeswoman for the Empire State Building said, “The claims are totally without merit and we will respond to them in court.”