Avoiding the Danegeld (Part 2)
As a follow up to my post on avoiding the Danegeld and limiting knowledge of employment settlements to those who have a need to know, here is an example of getting it right.
Recently, conservative pundit Glenn Beck and his media outlet, TheBlaze, Inc., were hit with a lawsuit from Tomi Lahren, a terminated on-air commentator. Lahren claimed that her firing was a violation of her employment agreement, arguing that the given reason – expressing an opinion that Beck disliked – was not sufficient grounds to constitute “cause” under the agreement. She sued alleging breach of contract. The parties recently settled and the case was dismissed.
That last fact is the kicker and I’ll repeat it for those in the back who weren’t listening: the parties recently settled and the case was dismissed. That’s it: no amount has been disclosed, no one has identified any terms of the settlement, no caustic comments or accusations have been published, nobody has done a victory dance and there has been no drama. Regardless of your political views and whether you like or dislike Beck or Lahren, this is how you want the scenario to go when settling an employment case. One can wonder about what they think happened – but in the end, that’s all just worthless speculation. The only people who actually know are the only ones that matter – the litigants (well, and their lawyers and accountants).