Klayman v. Judicial Watch, Inc.
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
255 F. Supp. 3d 161 (2017)
- Written by Salina Kennedy, JD
Facts
When Larry Klayman (plaintiff) was terminated from his job at Judicial Watch, Inc. (defendant), the parties entered into a severance agreement that included a nondisparagement clause. The nondisparagement clause prohibited each party from making or causing anyone else to make disparaging, defamatory, or negative comments or remarks about the other party. Klayman later sued Judicial Watch, alleging that it had breached the nondisparagement clause by using its influence to convince media outlets to shun Klayman. Klayman alleged that Judicial Watch’s actions had caused him to lose professional opportunities, including a CNN appearance. However, Klayman did not produce any evidence quantifying the money damages he had allegedly sustained. During the suit, the trial court sanctioned Klayman by limiting the types of damages he could pursue. The parties asked the court to clarify whether Klayman was permitted to pursue damages for harm to his reputation.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kollar-Kotelly, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
