Tiger Woods’s ex-girlfriend, Erica Herman, asks court to resolve dispute over NDA
Tiger Woods is back in court, this time via ex-girlfriend Erica Herman, who is requesting to be released from an NDA.
Maven – Sports Illustrated National, Maven – Sports Illustrated National
The ex-girlfriend of Tiger Woods filed a lawsuit against him this week that includes a four-page form with questions to be answered by her attorney. One of them gets right to the point:
“Does this case involve allegations of sexual abuse?”
“Yes,” responded the attorney for Erica Herman, the ex-girlfriend who filed the lawsuit.
Woods’ legal team didn’t return a message seeking comment, possibly because Woods is forbidden from discussing his private disputes with Herman in public. According to court records, the famed golfer entered into a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) with her in August 2017 – a document that was intended to ensure such privacy.
But here they are anyway. The famously private Woods, 47, once again is embroiled in a messy public controversy involving his personal life, adding to a list that includes dangerous driving incidents and a sex scandal. Now there’s a chance it could get even uglier after Herman filed this public lawsuit in Florida state court.
More: Tiger Woods sued by ex-girlfriend Erica Herman in larger domestic dispute over home, money
Sign up for our newsletter: All the sports news you need to know delivered right to you
Here is some background on the case and a look at where it might go next:
What is going on here?
After several years together, Woods broke up with Herman in October, according to court records obtained by USA TODAY Sports. She stated he had her locked out of the seaside mansion they shared in Florida, leading her to claim more than $30 million in damages.
She has filed two lawsuits – one filed in October against a homestead trust controlled by Woods and another on Monday against Woods himself. The latter lawsuit doesn’t seek monetary damages. It instead seeks to release her from her NDA with Woods under the federal Speak Out Act, a law that says NDAs aren’t enforceable in certain cases of sexual assault and harassment.
Though Herman has not made specific allegations of such conduct against Woods, her court filings imply she might if a court declares her NDA invalid in this case. Until then, Herman is “unsure whether she may disclose, among other things, facts giving rise to various legal claims she believes she has,” according to her lawsuit against Woods.
The two cases are related because Woods’ legal team says her NDA requires her to resolve her disputes with him in confidential arbitration, not in public court like this.
“By suing the Trust over conduct taken by Mr. Woods and his agents following the breakup, Ms. Herman seeks to flout her obligation to resolve all disputes with Mr. Woods in a confidential binding arbitration,” an attorney for the trust wrote in December. “Instead, in the context of litigation and the publicity that is likely to follow, Ms. Herman improperly seeks to leverage a payment from Mr. Woods in an amount that no arbitral forum would ever award. Such gamesmanship should not be tolerated.”
Who is Erica Herman?
Herman was the general manager of Woods’ restaurant, The Woods, in Jupiter, Florida, when they began their relationship. The two never married. She began living with Woods at his mansion in Florida in 2017 as “Woods’ invited guest,” according to court documents filed by the trust he controls.
Their relationship lasted until Oct. 13, 2022, when Woods notified Ms. Herman that he was breaking it off, the records state. She then was informed she was “no longer welcome” in their residence. According to her, she was locked out by agents of the trust after being tricked into packing a suitcase and leaving on a short vacation.
She claims she had an “oral tenancy agreement” to remain there for approximately five more years after the breakup. Her lawsuit against the trust said that “all expenses that related to (Herman’s) residency, or that resulted therefrom, were to be fully paid by the Defendant or its privies.”
It also states damages will be determined at trial “but is likely to be measured in excess of $30,000,000, given the substantial monthly rental value of the Residence.”
“The duties that were performed by, and expected of, Plaintiff (Herman) were extensive and of an extraordinary nature in light of the overall circumstances and environment in which she lived,” her lawsuit against the trust stated.
Her lawsuit against the trust is based on this agreement and names the trust, not Woods, as the defendant. But the trust was established and controlled by Woods. Its sole asset is its ownership interest in this residence.
What is she trying to do?
Generally, there are three broad reasons why someone would file a case like this, said attorney Morgan Fraser Mouchette, who is not involved in the case but specializes in legal agreements between married and unmarried partners.
“One possibility is something did happen between the two of them and she wants to get justice,” said Mouchette of the firm Blank Rome in New York.
Another general possibility is that she is angry she got kicked out of the house after a long-term relationship and wants to tell her side of the story. A third possibility, Mouchette said, is to pressure Woods to pay her a settlement even though she has yet to make specific allegations that might be true or not.
Herman doesn’t necessarily have to prove sexual assault or harassment to get her NDA set aside, Mouchette said. This is where it could get ugly, however.
“She has to submit sufficient evidence to convince the court that the NDA is unenforceable specifically under these federal acts,” Mouchette said.
Her attorney didn’t return a message seeking comment.
What is an NDA and what does this one say?
NDAs are generally contracts between two parties to ensure privacy or nondisclosure. Celebrities often ask for them when they enter into private relationships, helping ensure their private lives stay private. Businesses use them with employees to help protect their trade secrets.
In this case, Woods and Herman entered into their NDA near the outset of their relationship and signed it on Aug. 9, 2017, according to court records. Herman was the “promisor” and Woods was the “promisee,” the person to whom the promise was made.
They had a three-page NDA, much of which is redacted in court records except for a section on dispute resolution. That section says that “claims or controversies arising between us of any kind or nature whatsoever” shall be resolved by mandatory binding confidential arbitration. The idea behind this is to keep disputes private and out of public courts.
That all went out the window when Herman elected to file the lawsuits.
What is the Speak Out Act?
NDAs can be abused to help cover up misconduct by intimidating victims into silence, as many women allege happened with disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein. Former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson also spoke out against “predatory” NDAs after her sexual harassment case against Fox News boss Roger Ailes, leading to this law, which was signed by President Joe Biden in December.
The law generally says that no nondisclosure clause shall be judicially enforceable with respect to a sexual assault or harassment dispute that arose after the NDA was signed.
“The Speak Out Act does not cover all alleged illegal activity – it only covers sexual harassment (and assault),” said Evan Starr, a University of Maryland associate professor whose research aided the legislation. “By invoking this argument, she is implying something about sexual harassment (or assault) in this relationship.”
Herman is seeking a court ruling on the whether her NDA is enforceable under this law. She also wants the court to declare the arbitration clause unenforceable under the federal Ending Forced Arbitration Of Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment Act Of 2021, which has a similar purpose.
What is Woods’ response?
His legal team is trying to enforce the NDA and say the dispute should be resolved in private arbitration. It says Herman is trying to make an end-run around her NDA with Woods by suing the trust and not Woods. This brought the dispute into public court, where she can leverage the publicity Woods seeks to avoid over his personal life.
The trust’s attorneys also say her lawsuit against the trust is technically flawed. It was filed under the Florida Residential Landlord Tenant Act and claims she was a tenant with oral agreement to live in Woods’ residence. The attorneys say the alleged oral tenancy agreement is not a “rental agreement” as defined by the Act because it is not for a duration of less than one year, as established by law.
“Thus, Plaintiff cannot be said to be occupying the Residence under a ‘rental agreement,’ and, therefore, cannot be considered a ‘tenant’ under the Act,” they wrote.
They are asking the court to have that lawsuit dismissed and have not yet responded in court to the lawsuit over the NDA.
What’s next?
Depending on the rulings of the court, the case could go back into private arbitration or proceed in public court with mounting stakes and more revelations. Or Woods could decide to avoid all of it and pay Herman to go away quietly.
“His lawyers may be more interested in paying to get rid of this than they were before the filing” this week, Mouchette said.
Follow reporter Brent Schrotenboer @Schrotenboer. Email: bschrotenb@usatoday.com
