A Los Angeles Superior Court judge ordered the woman who accused former Los Angeles Dodgers pitcher Trevor Bauer of sexual assault to pay more than $300,000 for violating the terms of a settlement agreement on Monday. 

Lindsey Hill accused Bauer of sexual assault in 2021, leading to an MLB investigation that resulted in a massive suspension for Bauer. They would ultimately settle their lawsuits in 2023, with Bauer suing Hill for defamation, while she sued for assault and sexual battery. 

It was agreed that neither party would pay the other, but that changed after Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Daniel Crowley ordered Hill to pay Bauer $309,832.02. This comes after Hill’s attorneys told Bauer’s attorneys in an email that she would receive $300,000 from her insurance policy. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM

Bauer is to receive $220,000 for damages, while attorney fees ($68,939.55), interest ($16,634.52) and costs ($4,257.95) bring the grand total to more than $309,000. 

Hill breached their settlement agreement with each other by discussing Bauer on podcasts and in public appearances, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Bauer sued Hill in October, when the suit cited 21 claims on a podcast or social media, which were all alleged violations of their settlement agreement that prohibited her from saying Bauer or any representative "paid her any money as consideration for the settlement." Hill never contested or responded to the suit from Bauer. 

TREVOR BAUER CALLS OUT MLB AFTER PETE ROSE REINSTATEMENT WHILE HE REMAINS OUT OF LEAGUE

In turn, Crowley granted Bauer a default victory after Hill’s attorneys told Bauer’s attorneys they had not made a strong enough case in February, and then, did not justify their fees in April. 

While she has been ordered to pay Bauer, Hill went on a social media rant saying she would not oblige by the court’s decision. 

"Here’s all I’m gonna say – HE WILL NEVER SEE A CENT FROM ME AND HE KNOWS THIS," Hill posted on X with a heart emoji. "I was awarded 300k over what he did to me in 2021, and I refused to participate in this suit in any way shape or form. He will never see a cent. I refuse to give him money or my sanity. Love yall!"

Bauer’s agent, Rachel Luba, clapped back with her own post on her X account after seeing Hill’s response. 

"Note: I’m not sure she understands how the law works," Luba wrote. "Despite her claims, she doesn’t get to decide whether she pays him or not – Bauer will be able to garnish her wages and seize any assets. Additionally, she cannot appeal when she simply chose not to participate and defend herself against the lawsuit (which was very black and white to begin with and she stood zero chance to win regardless). Lastly, any money she conned from her insurance company initially was paid (because) they simply wanted to get the hell out of it (because) it was a losing case for them…"

Hill responded, "Oh sissy, when you battle a sociopath for years on end, you set your life up to not have your name tied to any assets. In terms of garnishing wages, ain’t gonna happen baby – catch me if you can. So sorry I won’t be contributing to your date night fund."

Bauer is currently pitching in Japan’s Nippon Professional Baseball League. He has been out of MLB for the past four years due to the sexual assault allegations that led to a 324-game suspension by MLB, but it was later reduced to 194 games after an appeal. 

His suspension may be up, but no MLB team has brought Bauer back into the fold. Bauer has never been one to shy away from sharing his thoughts, and he was not going to in this case. 

Bauer suggested this past August that MLB is the reason he cannot sign with another team – not because a team does not believe his talent is still there to perform at the big-league level. 

He most recently called out MLB after Pete Rose and other deceased former ballplayers were taken off the league’s permanently ineligible list. 

"So, since Pete is welcome back now, does that go for everyone who has been blackballed?" Bauer asked on X. "Or do you actually have to be guilty of something to qualify for that?"

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Karen Read’s defense team’s decision to not call her to the witness stand is a gamble that could help or hinder her case after the prosecution played her damaging interview clips in her second murder trial – allowing the jury to hear Read’s version of events in her own words. 

Read is facing the possibility of life in prison for the alleged murder of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe. The prosecution claims Read struck O’Keefe with her Lexus SUV in a drunken argument, leaving him to freeze to death in the front yard of a friend’s house party shortly after midnight on Jan. 29, 2022. 

Read’s defense team insists her vehicle never made contact with O’Keefe and there was no collision. 

"When I first came to practice, it was ‘never put your client on stand, ever,’" New York City defense attorney Louis Gelormino told Fox News Digital. "But I tend to disagree with that sometimes. I think we have gotten our biggest wins when we put our client on the stand." 

KAREN READ'S TRUE-CRIME DOCUMENTARIES MAY IMPACT SECOND TRIAL: COURT DOCS

On Tuesday, the defense submitted the team’s proposed jury instructions that indicate Read will not take the stand in her trial. 

"As you know, Ms. Read did not testify at this trial," the instructions read. "You may not hold that against her. Ms. Read has an absolute right not to testify because, as I've explained, she is presumed to be innocent and does not have to do anything to convince you she is innocent." 

The instructions stress that the reason Read chose to not take the witness stand is not relevant to the jury’s deliberations and cannot be considered evidence in her trial. Legal experts tell Fox News Digital the choice to keep a defendant from speaking may not always be the best choice. 

KAREN READ, ACCUSED KILLER OF COP BOYFRIEND, SHOWED NO EMOTION UNTIL JURY DELIBERATIONS: DOCUMENTARY

Gelormino said he believes Read would put on a strong performance on the witness stand, but calling her to testify does not come without risks. 

"I think the reason they're hiding her is because they don't want to have to have her explain all these videos that they saw of her not acting in a good way," Gelormino said.

KAREN READ JUDGE BLOCKS SANDRA BIRCHMORE MENTIONS; EXPERT SAYS CASES SHOULD BE WAKE-UP CALL FOR POLICE

Special prosecutor Hank Brennan played numerous clips from Read's televised interviews, picking out clips that could potentially damage the defense.

"I also wonder, did I say, ‘could I have hit him,’" Read said in a 2024 interview with Investigation Discovery. "Or was it told to me that I said I hit him. And I knew I never could’ve said that, so the closest thing I must’ve said was, ‘did I hit him?’"

In the clip, Read questions if she "really [said] it as many times as law enforcement is claiming." 

KAREN READ DEFENSE FLOATS THEORY THAT ‘JEALOUS’ BRIAN HIGGINS FOUGHT JOHN O'KEEFE BEFORE DEATH

In another clip, she talked about spiking her own drinks with extra shots because they weren't strong enough.

Gelormino said the defense team likely does not want Read to be confronted about her statements on cross-examination, possibly opening the door for days of tense questioning from the state. 

"They don't want to have her explaining all of these misbehaviors or what people would think would be bad behavior," Gelormino said. 

But the choice to keep Read off the stand could potentially keep her from providing an explanation for her statements in the interviews while also clarifying her side of the story. 

LEAD DETECTIVE'S TEXT MESSAGES CAST SHADOW OVER KAREN READ MURDER TRIAL 

"There are two sides of every coin," Gelormino told Fox News Digital. "You could put her on and try to have her explain it, or you can avoid it altogether." 

Gelormino pointed to the reality that Read could appear defensive while offering an explanation for her on-camera stories, which could shift the jury’s perception of her personality. 

"As a defense attorney, you are going to have to clean that up," Gelormino said. "So you are going to be spending a lot of time defending your character there." 

GET REAL-TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB

The videos pose a new obstacle for the defense, since they were not played in Read’s first trial last year. 

"The first jury almost convicted Read of manslaughter while operating under the influence," retired Massachusetts Superior Court Judge and Boston College law professor Jack Lu told Fox News Digital. "That was with no defendant video statements. Here, we have many damaging statements, and maybe a few more in rebuttal." 

FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X

Lu said the defense has not attempted to address the video clips or provide context regarding Read’s version of events at this point in the trial. 

"So, the same trial plus the damaging video, where the jury almost convicted, is bad for the defense," Lu said. 

As the defense continues calling witnesses, the notable absence of Read’s own testimony will likely only be fully felt once the jury reads its verdict, with the prosecution acting as the only side that opted to include her own words in the courtroom.  

"Based on the fact that they had a hung jury the last time, [the defense has] a decent case," Gelormino told Fox News Digital. "So do you want to mess that up with having her defend her actions and character for the next two or three days on the stand? That's a tough decision."