PDA

View Full Version : Aaron Spelling's Ex-Nurse Files Lawsuit



KIISQueen
01-30-2006, 08:02 AM
A nurse who was sued by TV producer Aaron Spelling last year for allegedly violating a confidentiality agreement has filed a lawsuit claiming he sexually harassed her.

Charlene Richards claims Spelling, 82, made sexual advances during her employment and engaged in other inappropriate behavior.

Her lawsuit was filed Thursday in Superior Court and names Spelling, his wife, Candy, and their trust fund. It seeks at least $25,000 in damages for sexual harassment and discrimination, battery, wrongful termination and other grounds.


The lawsuit also claims Richards worked unpaid overtime and never was issued tax forms by Spelling.

"There's no merit whatsoever to this case," Spelling's lawyer, Bert Fields, said Friday.

The claims are "scurrilous" and "we deny every one of them," Fields said. He claimed the lawsuit was retaliation for the Spellings' legal action against Richards.

"Anyone who knows Mr. Spelling would know that he could not, would not and did not do any of the things that these people allege," Fields said.

Spelling's TV hits include "Charlie's Angels," "Beverly Hills, 90210," "Dynasty" and "Fantasy Island."

Richards signed a confidentiality agreement when she began working as a home nurse for Spelling in November 2004. She was fired last April.

In November 2005, Spelling and his wife sued Richards and her lawyer for $5 million for allegedly violating a confidentiality agreement and spreading rumors that Spelling sexually harassed her.

The pending lawsuit claims the nurse threatened to reveal confidential information unless Spelling paid her "an unspecified amount" to settle her sexual harassment claims.



http://tv.yahoo.com/news/ap/20060127/113841090000.html

Grimm
01-30-2006, 10:33 AM
Wait a minute here...

If It was untrue that the nurse was sexualy harassed then it would not be covered by a confedentiality agreement. It would be slander or libel. Since it didn't occur, it couldn't be a violation of said agreement.

Now if it was true that the nurse was sexualy harassed, the confedentiality agreement would not apply due to worker's rights laws. And the claim that the exposure of that complaint is a violation of the confedentialy agreement is an implicit addmition that the sexual harassment occured.

molecularfire
01-30-2006, 07:06 PM
Yeah, there is something that doesn't make sense about the way the article was written. It says that they sued her for spreading rumors about sexual harrassment and basically using the threat of leaking confidential information to try to get them to settle the suit but it said that she just filed the suit... so was this a different suit (i.e. did she file two suits), did they get the timeline wrong, or did she travel back in time and told her old self about the future suit and to try to get them to agree to settle it before it got filed to save the court fees.