What a strange set of allegations! If any of those are true, I really feel for her... however... unless she has some sort of convincing evidence, I doubt this will go anywhere. So, legally speaking, even if the person you are suing is the scum of the Earth, you still have to meet the burden of proof, and in a civil case that means that the plaintiff has to meet the "preponderance of evidence." That basically means that the plaintiff must submit evidence that is 1. higher quality than the defendant, 2. more important or more relevant than what the defendant provides, and 3. if quantitatively more than the defendant's evidence. So, I suppose it depends on what she has, but you know Giuliani will simply retort with "Your honour, that's not true!" unless she has something akin to a "smocking gun." If her angle in the complaint is that she agreed to work in return for favours, (especially if those favours involved other parties who weren't aware of her agreement with Giuliani), and that she consented to inappropriate stuff and then withdrew consent once it became clear that those favours were never coming, she's really not starting off on the right footing. Most judges in the USA would refuse to hear a case like this simply because it's all based off of illegal agreements between the two parties, similar to if you sued a drug dealer for selling you fake drugs.