After seeing the case between Tiger Woods and his ex-girlfriend Erica Herman case finally play out to its conclusion in the Florida courts, 

it may mark the first time I would be in favor of judicial reform.

A week ago, on November 10, Herman, a former employee at Woods’s restaurant, 

The Woods Jupiter, filed to dismiss her complaint to invalidate a Non-Disclosure Agreement between herself and Woods with prejudice.

The case was originally filed on March 6, and since then it tediously progressed through the courts. Herman filed a complaint for declaratory judgement, 

which sought to invalidate the NDA that Herman and Woods signed back on August 9, 2017.

In the initial complaint, Herman argued that the case should be heard by a jury and not an arbitrator, as required in the NDA. 

For her reason, she cited the newly adopted federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021.

While Herman’s complaint had no specific allegations of sexual assault or sexual harassment, the inference from the complaint was that Woods either sexually assaulted or sexually harassed Herman while either in Woods’s employ or during their relationship.

From the day of the filing until the voluntary dismissal of the complaint by Herman, SI was not able to identify one claim in writing that spoke to Woods or anyone else involved with Woods committing untoward actions towards Herman.

And clearly while the inference was made in numerous court documents and even in a court hearing on May 9, where the case was initially dismissed by the court, this did not stop Herman from dragging out the newly adopted federal statute, while apparently not providing any evidence of such acts at any and all opportunities in her court filings.

In her voluntary dismissal, Herman stated the following:

“In dismissing this action, Erica Herman states that she was never a victim of sexual harassment or sexual abuse at the hands of Tiger Woods or any of his agents and it is her position that she has never asserted a claim for such.”

Which makes you wonder why was there ever a mention of the federal statute on sexual assault and sexual harassment to begin with?

Where are the Florida courts and Florida Bar on this issue? Not only was the courts’ time wasted, but Woods reputation was dragged through the mud and his family has had to deal with the allegations as well.

Why was the federal statute ever mentioned in the initial complaint and referenced again on at least one other occasion, hanging over Woods’s head like the sword of Damocles?

It was wrong, and the actions of Herman and her attorneys should be reviewed.

Everyone deserves their day in court and with the best representation possible, but when you try to shame or create judicial blackmail in hopes of achieving your goal — in this case a larger payout from Woods — then the system needs a review.

Follow us to see more useful information, as well as to give us more motivation to update more useful information for you.

Source: USA Today