Photo: Getty Images North America
A Florida judge has ruled in favor of golfer Tiger Woods in a lawsuit filed by his ex-girlfriend, ordering that the public dispute be resolved in private arbitration, USA TODAY reports.
Judge Elizabeth Metzger ruled in favor of Woods' intention to have the conflict with Erica Herman be handled out of the public eye after it escalated into public court with allegations of sexual assault.
"The parties are ordered to submit this action to arbitration," Metzger ruled via USA TODAY. "Pursuant to applicable law, this case is stayed pending completion of arbitration. The parties shall advise the Court once arbitration has been completed. The Clerk of the Court shall administratively close this case."
Woods' attorney said the two signed a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) in 2017, but a larger dispute took place after their breakup in October when Herman claimed that Woods arranged to kick her out of his house, which she said violated an oral tenancy agreement in which she was allowed to live there for several more years. Herman then sued Woods, claiming more than $30 million in damages, while the 15-time major champion intended to handle the issue privately and in adherence with the NDA agreement.
Herman later filed a lawsuit against Woods in an effort to have a court declare the NDA invalid in March, with her attorney citing new federal laws in which NDAs and forced arbitration agreements are ruled invalid in disputes involving sexual harassment.
"Importantly, Herman has not 'denied' that her signature is on the NDA," the judge ruled via USA TODAY. "Herman additionally has not 'denied' that the clear terms of the NDA require the resolution of her disputes, claims or controversies with Woods via binding, confidential arbitration."
Herman claimed that Woods pursued a sexual relationship with her while she was working at his Jupiter, Florida, restaurant -- where she worked until her resignation in 2020 -- and forced her to sign an NDA or be fired. Metzger asked Herman's attorney, Benjamin Hodas, to clarify the sexual harassment claim in the case, but Hodas declined, claiming it could possibly violate the NDA that required Herman to keep her relationship with Woods confidential.
Hodas instead wanted the court to provide more clarity on what could and couldn't be revealed without violating the previously agreed to NDA, but the judge said Herman and Hodas didn't provide sufficient evidence backing the sexual harassment issue.