Tiger Woods and Erica Herman’s legal battle is heating up!
Woods’ team just responded to Erica’s court filing, calling her his “jilted ex-girlfriend.”
On Wednesday, Herman filed papers to request nullification of a nondisclosure agreement that she signed when she started dating Tiger in 2017.
She cited the Speak Out Act, which “prohibits the judicial enforceability of a nondisclosure clause or nondisparagement clause agreed to before a dispute arises involving sexual assault or sexual harassment in violation of federal, tribal, or state law.”
Tiger’s new court docs deny any sexual wrongdoing, insisting, “Ms. Herman is a not a victim of sexual assault or abuse sought to be protected by Congress when enacting the statute.”
“Rather, Ms. Herman is a jilted ex-girlfriend who wants to publicly litigate specious claims in court, rather than honor her commitment to arbitrate disputes in a confidential arbitration proceeding.”
The papers ask the court to “compel the arbitration of the claims in Ms. Herman’s complaint.”
Before Erica asked for nullification of the NDA, she filed to sue Woods for $30 million, claiming that he broke an “oral tenancy agreement.” She says the agreement gave her the right to live in his $54-million mega mansion for five more years. Tiger’s side claims she was only allowed to live there while they were dating.
She even claims was tricked into packing a suitcase for a short vacation. Once she arrived at the airport, Woods’ team allegedly “told her she had been locked out of the residence.”
His new docs hit back, stating, “In October 2022, Mr. Woods ended his relationship with Ms. Herman. As part of a concerted effort to evade her arbitration obligations under the Agreement, Ms. Herman responded to the breakup by filing a $30 million lawsuit against a trust of which Mr. Woods and his children are the sole beneficiaries.”
The papers continue, “With the first baseless lawsuit facing insurmountable legal obstacles, and after Mr. Woods initiated arbitration against Ms. Herman… Ms. Herman then filed this second action directly against Mr. Woods — again in violation of her arbitration obligations under the Agreement — seeking to invalidate the Agreement itself.”