Tomi Lahren vs. Glenn Beck and The Blaze
Tomi Lahren vs. Glenn Beck and The Blaze
Tomi Lahren vs. Glenn Beck and The Blaze
DALLAS COUNTY
4/7/2017 7:53:37 AM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
Tonya Pointer
DC-17-04087
CAUSE NO. ______________
complaining of Defendants Glenn Beck (Beck) and TheBlaze, Inc. (TBI) (collectively,
Defendants) and for her causes of action shows the Court as follows:
I.
DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN
Pursuant to Rule 190 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, this case shall be
II.
RULE 47 DISCLOSURES
Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief and the attorneys fees sought herein are within the
Plaintiff, Tomi Larhen, is a citizen of Dallas County, Texas, who may be contacted
only through her undersigned attorney of record, Brian P. Lauten, c/o Deans & Lyons, LLP,
Defendant, Glenn Beck, is a citizen of Dallas County, Texas, who may be served with
process at his place of business located at 6301 Riverside Drive, Building 1, Irving, Texas
75039.
Defendant, TheBlaze, Inc., is a corporation with its principal place of business at 6301
Riverside Drive Building 1, Irving, Dallas County, Texas 75039 and it may be served with
process by serving its registered agent as follows: Corporation Service Company d/b/a CSC-
Lawyers Incorporating Service Company, 211 E. 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701-
3218.
IV.
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, PERSONAL JURISDICTION,
& VENUE IS PROPER IN DALLAS COUNTY
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction because this is an application for
declaratory relief, pursuant to Chapter 37 of the Civil Practice & Remedies Code. See TEX.
CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE 37.004 (Vernon Supp. 2014). Furthermore, the attorneys fees
sought against Defendants under 37.009 and/or 38.002 of the Civil Practice & Remedies
Code are within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. Under 15.002 of the Civil Practice
& Remedies Code, venue is proper in Dallas County because: (i) a substantial portion of the
Defendants are domiciled in Dallas County; and/or (iii) the contract fixes venue in Dallas
V.
BRIEF FACTUAL PREDICATE
Plaintiff did not want to file this lawsuit, but the conduct of Defendants and their
refusal to resolve this matter without court intervention has left Plaintiff with no choice but
to seek relief in a Dallas County District Court per the terms of the parties employment
agreement.
A.
Plaintiff has been Wrongfully Terminated
Without Cause and in Breach of the Employment Contract
On or about September 9, 2015, Plaintiff and TBI entered into that certain
rising star in the news and entertainment industry, who has millions of followers on social
media and on television, was hired by TBI as a Broadcast Host Commentator & Online
Video Commentator and Writer. See id. (p. 1, 2). Plaintiffs employment commenced on
September, 1, 2015, and was to continue through September 30, 2017, unless terminated for
On or about March 17, 2017, in her appearance on the television show The View,
Plaintiff stated that she was pro-choice saying, I cant sit here and be a hypocrite and say Im
for limited government but I think the government should decide what women do with
participation by her producer who traveled with Plaintiff to her appearance on The View.
Plaintiff also received several congratulatory emails from TBI employees. No one told
Plaintiff that her statements on The View were either improper or inappropriate; and,
indeed, Plaintiffs point of view is just thather point of view and freedom of expression.
Moreover, Defendants knew that Plaintiff had expressed her personal view in this
regard several times previously and they never took any issue with it. A few days later,
however, Plaintiff was contacted by TBIs Human Resources Director/Supervisor and advised
that she was suspended indefinitely and that she need not return to TBIs office(s), all
because of her pro-choice opinions expressed on The View. Plaintiff was understandably
disappointed, saddened, and in shock for being suspended for freely expressing her opinions,
which certainly reconcile with what is the law of the land in the United States i.e., a
womans constitutional right to choose and in no way inconsistent with any of Plaintiffs
Several days later, Plaintiff received yet another call from a TBI Human Resources
Director/Supervisor who made it clear that Plaintiffs services were no longer needed by TBI,
her employment was terminated, she would have no more shows, but TBI would
nevertheless continue to pay Plaintiffpresumably hoping they could find an exit strategy
to sanitize their unlawful conduct under the Employment Contract. Plaintiff was told that
she was to remain silent, she was directed to stay away from her Facebook page and other
essence, Defendants wrongly insisted, with no legal support, that Plaintiff go dark on social
media. Notably, none of these admonitions are grounded in any legal basis that can be
Meanwhile, as Plaintiff heeded the unlawful admonitions, Beck and others within
TBI embarked on a public smear campaign attacking Plaintiff and chastising her political
views and opinions in a clear attempt to embarrass, humiliate, and undermine Plaintiffs
reach to her audience on social media and elsewhere. Beck and others associated with TBI
retaliation for Plaintiff having expressed her personal viewpoint on a public television show.
To add insult to injury, at TBIs place of business in Irving, Texas, TBI employees
stretched yellow caution tape spelling an X on Plaintiffs office/dressing room door. In fact,
TBI terminated Plaintiffs email account. Plaintiffs unilateral suspension and termination by
TBI underscores the point that Beck and TBI have a political-opinion litmus test, which
cannot be reconciled with the Employment Contract that specifically authorizes Plaintiff to
express her own views without the threat of retaliation and which makes abundantly clear
that Plaintiff can only be terminated for one of the clearly defined reasons set forth for
cause.
Apparently recognizing the gravity of their unlawful misconduct, TBIs legal counsel
attempted to put the genie back in the proverbial bottle by taking the position ex-post that
blocking any use and access by Plaintiff to her followers and listeners on Facebook.
Defendants unlawful conduct was intended to interfere, damage, and/or harass Plaintiff and
inflate Becks profile, from what has become a mediocre following, all at Plaintiffs expense.
At the core of the dispute, the Employment Contract clearly provides that Plaintiff
can only be terminated for cause. The following are the sole bases upon which Plaintiffs
As can be readily seen from the above, Plaintiff expressing her First Amendment
rights and her personal opinions about a womans right to choose is not a for cause ground
Accordingly, as a proximate cause of TBIs unlawful conduct, with the participation, concert,
and/or encouragement of Beck, TBI has materially and wrongfully breached the
Contract. Under the circumstances, Plaintiff is also allowed to fully compete with
Defendants and she is entitled to rescission of the Employment Contract in order to return
B.
TBI with the Concert and Participation of Beck Materially
Breached the Employment Contract Warranting Rescission
It is not a secret within TBI that Beck is known for berating, belittling, and acting in a
condescending and heavy-handed way and his treatment of Plaintiff, in particular, is a case
in point. Of note, TBI, with the concert, participation, and/or encouragement of Beck made
and/or represented contractually (in writing and orally) to produce [t]wo hundred thirty 1-
hour programs [which were to] be created each calendar year, with replays twice over a 24-
never come close to meeting the benchmark of 230 one-hour programs. Defendants
promises to deliver a sum certain, minimum threshold of episodes went to the core of the
their promises to produce the minimum number of episodes is a clear, undisputed, and
warranting Plaintiffs right to (a) fully rescind the Employment Contract, (b) be released
from the Employment Contract, (c) be permitted to fully compete with Defendants with no
restrictions whatsoever, and (d) to recover her attorneys fees. Compare TEX. CIV. PRAC. &
REM. CODE 38.002 (Vernon Supp. 2014) (breach of contract attorneys fees), with, TEX. CIV.
PRAC. & REM. CODE 37.009 (Vernon Supp. 2014) (authorizing attorneys fees under the
C.
Defendants Continue to Wrongfully Control the
Administrative Access to Plaintiffs Facebook Page
Plaintiff for expressing her free speech rights in opposing governmental intervention into
womens health issues, and, particularly, a womans constitutional right to choose. To this
end, and despite the fact that Plaintiff was unilaterally terminated, Defendants have refused
to relinquish their administrative control and access to Plaintiffs Facebook page and, in the
absence of a court order, they will not return it to her. Because Defendants have complete
to add material, delete material, change passwords, and to terminate the page altogether.
not any form of miscellaneous property that belongs to TBI under the Employment Contract.
Defendants, under principles of tort law, are estopped from manipulating Plaintiffs Facebook
page in any way to portray Plaintiff in a false light. Plaintiff has literally millions of
followers on social media, she uses social media to interface with her audience, and, as a
Plaintiff is being irreparably harmed, she has no adequate remedy at law, and she is entitled
D.
The Arbitration Clause does not Foreclose Plaintiffs
Right to Seek Declaratory and Injunctive Relief in this Court
Employment Contract; however, that provision does not foreclose Plaintiffs unfettered
rights to pursue declaratory and injunctive relief in this Court, which is one of competent
jurisdiction. See Exhibit A (EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT) (p. 6, 19). Plaintiff also attaches
B. On information and belief, Plaintiff never signed an NDA. Assuming arguendo that
Plaintiff did in fact sign an NDA, it would have been after she was already employed by TBI
and, thus, it would be unsupported by any new consideration and void on its face.
under Texas law, Plaintiff is entitled to a declaration to the contrary from this Court. The
governing document that controls the disposition of this lawsuit in Plaintiffs favor is the
VI.
CAUSES OF ACTION
forth fully herein at length. Pursuant to Chapter 37 of the Civil Practice & Remedies Code,
there is an actual and justiciable controversy between the parties regarding the interpretation
of the Employment Contract. Plaintiff seeks a judicial declaration, inter alia, of the
following, to-wit: (i) that Defendants wrongfully terminated Plaintiff without cause; (ii) that
Defendants have, in multiple ways, materially breached and anticipatorily repudiated the
Employment Contract, Plaintiff is fully excused from further performance; (iv) Plaintiff is
entitled to complete rescission of the Employment Contract and a return to the status quo
ex-ante; (v) Plaintiff is not bound or restricted in any way from pursuing alternative
employment that competes directly with Defendants; (vi) Plaintiff is entitled to express her
salient views on the propriety of Defendants and particularly Becks misconduct, which
should be exposed for what it is; (vii) Defendants should be enjoined and required to pay
Plaintiff under the Employment Contract the agreed upon amounts for the duration of the
signed an NDA, which is denied, she is not restrained in any way by any NDA under
principles of contract law because, in the absence of any new consideration allegedly signed
post-employment, the NDA, if any, is nudum pactum. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE
forth fully herein at length. Plaintiff would show that, at all material times, there was an
offer, an acceptance, mutual assent, consideration, capable parties, and a bargained for
Employment Contract including, but not limited toDefendants failure to produce the 230
thereunder and is entitled to rescission of the Employment Contract to return the parties to
forth fully herein at length. Plaintiff would show that Beck and TBI knowingly,
with Plaintiffs livelihood, her ability to pursue alternative employment, and he/they and/or
it continues to interfere with Plaintiffs ability to reach her intended audience. Beck has
tortiously interfered with Plaintiffs Employment Contract and both Defendants singularly,
collectively, and/or disjunctively have wrongfully interfered with her business relationships
VII.
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (TRO),
TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
forth fully herein at length. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants unlawful
requested herein, Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm for which she has no adequate
remedy at law. Defendants conduct is without right or entitlement and intended to harm
and/or injure Plaintiff. Based on the foregoing allegations, Plaintiff has established a
probable right of recovery including for the remedy of rescission against Defendants.
Plaintiff seeks, specifically, the immediate return and complete access and administrative
control to her Facebook page and any other social media account.
temporary injunction, and permanent injunction will further the public interest including
protecting Plaintiffs unfettered right to speak freely. Greater injury will be inflicted upon
Plaintiff by denying injunctive relief than upon Defendants were the relief to be granted.
Plaintiffs application for injunctive relief is reasonably directed to prevent, deter, and
discontinue Defendants wrongful and inequitable conduct and preserve precious freedoms,
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter a TRO, as well as a
temporary and permanent injunction, which will have the legal effect to:
VIII.
PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER HER ATTORNEYS FEES
UNDER 37.009 AND/OR 38.002 OF THE CPRC
forth fully herein at length. Plaintiff, pursuant to 37.009 (the declaratory judgment statute)
and/or 38.002 (breach of contract) of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, seeks the
Defendants be cited to appear and answer herein; that Plaintiff recover judgment against
Defendants jointly and severally; that Plaintiff be awarded rescission of the Employment
Contract; that a temporary restraining order and temporary and permanent injunctive relief
be entered; that Plaintiff recover her attorneys fees and costs as well as all other relief
whether in law or in equity upon which she may show herself justly entitled.
Pursuant to Local Rule 2.02 of Dallas County, Plaintiffs Counsel certifies that, upon
information and belief, Defendants in this litigation are or will be represented by Christie
Newkirk, Esq. with the Dallas law firm of Quilling Selander Lownds Winslett & Moser, P.C.
Ms. Newkirk is being served with a copy of this pleading through the Dallas County ECF
case manager system and by electronic mail. Plaintiffs Counsel intends to pursue a hearing
on the TRO on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at a time to be set by the District Court assigned to
hear this matter. Plaintiffs Counsel certifies that he will provide more than the two hours
minimum notice set forth in Local Rule 2.02 and will duly serve notice upon opposing
counsel when a hearing date is formally set by the District Judge assigned.
_____________________________________
Brian P. Lauten
Attorney for Plaintiff
Tomi Lahren
_____________________________________
Brian P. Lauten (LEAD COUNSEL)
Texas Bar No. 24031603
[email protected]
Michael P. Lyons
Texas Bar No. 24013074
[email protected]
Christopher J. Simmons
Texas Bar No. 24058796
[email protected]
Whereas, Company has agreed to employ Employee in the full-time position of Host/Writer beginning
on September 1, 2015;
Whereas, in that position Employee will have access to information Business Information and
Personal Information, as defined below; and
Whereas, it would be inappropriate and harmful for Employee to disclose or use Business
Information or Personal Information, other than in the performance of Employees work for Company;
1. Consideration. Employee has agreed to sign this Agreement in exchange for Company
agreeing to employ Employee and allowing Employee to begin work. Employee understands and agrees Employee
would not have been employed or allowed to begin work had Employee not agreed to be bound by the terms of this
Agreement.
4. Confidentiality. Employee agrees that, during and after Employees employment with
Company, Employee will keep all Business Information, all Personal Information and the terms of this Agreement in
strict confidence, and not use it for any purpose, or disclose it to any person or entity, other than as necessary during the
bona fide performance of Employees work for Company, or as necessary to confidentially arbitrate a dispute pursuant
to Paragraph 8.
5. Return of Property. Employee agrees that at the end of Employees employment for
whatever reason, and at any other time upon Companys request, Employee will: (a) return to Company all
property, including without limitation all originals and all copies of all documents, whether or not they contain
Business Information or Personal Information, and whether stored on computers or in hard copy, in Employees
possession, custody or control that made or obtained during and as a result of Employees employment with Company,
other than documents related to Employees compensation and benefits, such as pay stubs and benefit statements; and
(b) provide Company with access to all personal computers, personal digital assistants, and other computer and
electronic storage devices, regardless of ownership, used by Employee during Employees employment with Company
so that Company may examine such equipment and remove therefrom any information obtained by Employee during
and as a result of Employees employment by Company.
6. Publicity and Non-Disparagement. Employee agrees that Employee will not, directly or
indirectly, at any time during and after the end of Employees employment for whatever reason:
a. Photograph, or make any digital, audio, visual or other recording of, make notes
regarding, or collect or preserve any other personal information regarding, or take
anything from or anything that was used or discarded by, Company, Beck or any of his
employees or family members, or anyone known by Employee to be a friend or other
associate of Beck.
b. Other than in the bona fide course of Employees employment by the Company,
bring any publicity to any aspect of the business of Company, or the personal life of
Beck, or any of his employees or family members, or anyone known by Employee to be
a friend or other associate of Beck. For example, without limitation, Employee will not
make any public or private comments or disclosures about Company, Beck or any of
his employees or, family members, or anyone known by Employee to be a friend or
associate, by communicating with any member of the news media, posting comments
on blogs, giving interviews, disclosing facts or expressing personal views, opinions
or judgments or through any member of the media or to or through any other entity or
person. Without limited the foregoing, Employee may list the fact he works (or, held
following the end of his employment, worked) for the Company, the dates of
employment and the position(s) held, on resumes, LinkedIn and the like, without
commenting further on that employment.
Nothing in this Agreement will prevent Employee from responding truthfully to any governmental inquiry, or pursuant
to any lawfully issued subpoena; provided, however, Employee shall provide Company with prompt written notice
of any such request or requirement so that Company may seek a protective order or other appropriate remedy and/or
waive compliance with the provisions of this Agreement.
8. Governing Law: Statutory and Common Law Duties. This Agreement shall be governed by
New York law. This Agreement is intended, among other things, to supplement, as applicable, the duties Employee
owes Company under statutory and common law, including without limitation duties under the Uniform Trade Secrets
Protection Act, and the duty of loyalty, and does not in any way abrogate any of the obligations or duties Employee
otherwise owes to Company or any other entity or individual.
9. Arbitration. Any and all disputes, controversies or claims arising out of or relating to this
Agreement, Employees provision of services to Company, the termination of this Agreement, or Employees post-
employment obligations shall be finally resolved by arbitration administered by the American Arbitration Association
(the AAA), although in the case of Employees post-employment restrictions, Company may seek a temporary
restraining order and/or injunctive relief in court pending arbitration or an arbitration award. Either party may
initiate arbitration by written notice to the other. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the AAA rules
governing the resolution of commercial disputes in effect at the time of the arbitration (including, without limitation,
rules applicable to the selection of the arbitrator), except as they may be modified by the provisions of this Agreement.
The place of arbitration shall be New York, New York. The arbitration shall commence within thirty days after the
appointment of the arbitrator; the arbitration shall be completed within sixty days of commencement; and the
arbitrators award shall be made within thirty days following such completion. The parties may agree to extend
those time limits. The arbitrator will render an award and a written opinion in support thereof. Such award shall
include the costs related to the arbitration and reasonable attorneys fees and expenses to the prevailing party. The
parties keep all aspects of the arbitration, including the existence and substance of the underlying dispute, and the
claims and defenses raised in arbitration, strictly confidential, except as necessary to enforce any award, or to respond to
a lawfully issued subpoena or other governmental inquiry.
10. Remedy in Event of a Breach. Employee agrees that, in the event of a breach by
Employee of any provision of this Agreement, Employee will pay all damages caused, and attorneys fees incurred, as a
result of that breach, to any entity or individual that or who suffered damages and/or reasonably incurred attorneys fees
as a result of that breach, and to disgorge any benefit Employee obtained as a result of the breach. Without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, any entity or individual that or who was damaged as a result of a breach shall be entitled to
immediate injunctive relief from a court and from an arbitrator, without the obligation to post a bond, to prevent any
further breaches of this Agreement, and Employee shall pay to the entity or individual that or who suffered damages as
a result of that breach including, without limitation, any payments received and/or any profits generated, as a result of
Employees breach of this Agreement.
11. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties with
respect to the subjects specifically addressed herein, and supersedes any prior agreements, understandings, or
representations, oral or written, on the subjects addressed herein. This Agreement may not be amended, supplemented,
or modified except by a written document signed by both Company and Employee.
By:
Geri Sanderson Tomi Lahren
Human Resources Manager
Date: Date:
EXHIBIT
B