Tiger Woods’ Ex-Girlfriend Rushes Back To Court, Pleads With Judge For New Hearing
Jun. 2 2023, Published 12:30 p.m. ET
Tiger Woods’ ex-girlfriend Erica Herman has pleaded with a judge to reconsider his ruling moving her lawsuit against the golfer out of the public eye, RadarOnline.com has learned.
According to court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, Erica is asking the court to set a rehearing and reconsider the decision that sent her case to arbitration.
As we previously reported, Erica and Tiger broke up last year after a lengthy romance. The two initially met when Erica worked at Tiger’s restaurant in Florida.
She claimed during the relationship he promised she could live at his Florida mansion for a specific number of years.
After the split, she was still living in the home. However, she claimed his team tricked her into leaving and then changed the locks. Erica said there were 5 years left on the alleged deal. She sued demanding $30 million in damages.
In addition, she filed a separate lawsuit demanding an alleged NDA that Tiger had her sign be thrown out.
- Tiger Woods’ Ex-Girlfriend Rips His Bombshell Witness In $30 Million Battle, Accuses Him Of Taking Her Pets After Breakup
- Tiger Woods’ Ex-girlfriend Erica Herman Feels ‘Humiliated’ and ‘Wants to Collect for Her Troubles’: Sources
- Tiger Woods’ Ex-Girlfriend Erica Herman Asks Judge If She’s Allowed To Spill Secrets She Learned Prior To Signing 2017 NDA
Erica argued Tiger had committed sexual harassment. "Mr. Woods was Ms. Herman’s boss,’’ her attorney wrote. "On Mr. Woods’ own portrayal of events, he imposed an NDA on her as a condition to keep her job when she began having a sexual relationship with him. A boss imposing different work conditions on his employee because of their sexual relationship is sexual harassment."
She argued the alleged sexual harassment meant the NDA should be thrown out. Tiger denied the allegations. He disputed the claim he promised Erica she could live in his house even if they split. His lawyer said, "Ms. Herman's position is utterly meritless.”
Tiger demanded the NDA battle be heard in arbitration, which is a private proceeding outside of the public eye. He said the NDA contained verbiage that stated any disputes would be heard in arbitration, not state court.
Recently, a judge ended up ruling in his favor and sent the case to arbitration. However, now, Erica wants that decision reconsidered.
She argued that third-party declarations submitted by Tiger to back up his claims were full of “hearsay.” Further, she said, “all of the purported evidence was submitted untimely in an effort to conduct “trial by ambush” against [Erica]."
Erica said Tiger had “neither authenticated any of the purported copies of the alleged non-disclosure agreement.”
Erica said the court’s ruling relied on Tiger’s witnesses, which she said should not have happened.
Tiger has yet to respond.