Wendy Williams’ Ex-Husband Fighting Talk Show Producers’ Attempt to Pause His $10 Million Wrongful Termination Lawsuit

“The termination of [Kevin] was based strictly upon [Kevin’s] marital status and his impending divorce to the Show’s host, ignoring all of the contributions that [Kevin] made to make the Show a success,” his lawsuit read.

In his lawsuit, Kevin said he was instrumental in The Wendy Williams Show becoming a massive hit. He said he took care of Wendy behind the scenes and came up with several of her show’s segments including Hot Topics and Shoe Cam.

Further, Kevin said he had the final say on guests, developed marketing plans, and helped bridge the gap between the show and the African-American community due to the producer’s alleged lack of understanding of the show’s audience.

Kevin argued that the producers violated New York law when they fired him due to his “marital status.” He argued they had no legal reason to fire him.

In response, the producers denied all allegations of wrongdoing. They argued that Kevin and his lawyers were misreading the law.

The producers argued the New York law cited by Kevin prohibited an employer from discriminating against an employee based on their marital status — whether they are married or unmarried.

Recently, the producers filed a new motion asking for the case to be put on pause. They asked for permission to appeal and ask a higher court to review the recent ruling.

The producer said they still disagreed with the court finding Hunter had stated a claim for “marital status discrimination.”

In their filing, the producers said Kevin will not face any harm if they are allowed to take the matter to the higher court. They said Wendy’s ex waited three years to file his lawsuit and faces no prospect of continuing harm, “given that he is no longer employed by Defendants and, indeed, The Wendy Williams Show is no longer airing or in production.”

Kevin has demanded the producers not be allowed to drag out his case or take it to the appellate court. He said the appeal they are asking for is a “a rare exception to the final judgment rule that generally prohibits piecemeal appeals,” and as such are “strongly disfavored” and will only be justified in “exceptional circumstances.”

He said, “There is thus no basis to believe that either the Second Circuit or the New York Court of Appeals would rule differently from this Court.”

“Ultimately, what the defendants are seeking is to jump ahead in line – to shortcut the ordinary rules of federal civil procedure and to prioritize appellate review of their case over other litigants who have complied with those rules and waited their turn,” Kevin’s lawyer added.

Kevin demanded his case move forward as scheduled.