Advertisement

Attorneys for Tiger Woods and ex-girlfriend Erica Herman square off in court Tuesday

STUART, Fla. – After months of legal wrangling, attorneys for Tiger Woods and his ex-girlfriend Erica Herman argued during a hearing Tuesday over a non-disclosure agreement that’s at the heart of a dispute that began in October.

Woods wasn’t with a trio of lawyers who represented him before Circuit Judge Elizabeth Metzger in a hearing that lasted about an hour at the Martin County Courthouse in Stuart.

Erica Herman, 39, Woods’ live-in girlfriend until October 2022, also skipped the hearing at which her attorneys claimed she didn’t recall signing an NDA dated Aug. 9, 2017, that mandated any disputes between she and Woods would be litigated in private arbitration.

Herman was the general manager of Woods’ restaurant, The Woods, in Jupiter, Florida, when they began their relationship. The two never married.

TIGER'S EX-GIRLFRIEND ON NDA IN 2017 I don’t want to be `heartbroken and jobless’

COURT FILING Tiger Woods' ex-girlfriend provides new details about how he broke up with her

After peppering each side with questions about the validity of the NDA, Metzger said she would issue a ruling from her chambers but didn’t indicate when that would happen.

Non-disclosure agreement

Much of Tuesday's hearing involved arguments related to whether the signed agreement was both authentic and valid.

Herman is fighting the NDA with the famed golfer, and in court, her lead attorney Benjamin T. Hodas, of West Palm Beach, challenged the authenticity of the agreement.

“My client does not recall signing this document,” Hodus said. "She is not familiar with her signature on the document.”

Tiger Woods' attorneys argue before Circuit Judge Elizabeth Metzger Tuesday, May, 9, 2023, in the Martin County Courthouse  in Stuart that his ex-girlfriend's lawsuit against him should be halted because Erica Herman, 39, signed a nondisclosure agreement requiring that any disagreements between them be settled in private by an arbitrator. Judge Metzer did not give a ruling in court, but is expected to rule this week. Herman is suing Woods to get out of the agreement, saying she was the victim of his sexual harassment. She has also filed a separate $30 million illegal eviction lawsuit against the trust that owns his $54 million Florida mansion.

He said they needed Metzger to determine "what is arbitrable and what is not."

"Your honor, we need clarification from you whether this contract is even a valid contract. If it is a valid contract, what is the scope of the contractual terms and obligations herein," Hodas said.

Metzger pressed Hodas to clarify his position related to the validity of the NDA.

"Contract law tells me I look at the document, and ... I ask, 'Is it valid on its face?' I've got dates, I've got signatures. I've got terms," she told Hodas. "Tell me why it's not valid on its face."

"Because we have a dispute that it is, in fact valid," he replied. "And unfortunately, I can't present any evidence to you in that regard, because we've been precluded from receiving any evidence."

"You're telling me as an officer of the court, that signature is not valid?" Metzger continued.

"I'm telling you my client cannot say for certain that that's her signature. And she does not recall signing this document," said Hodas, "which is why I would like to have some discovery to determine what the facts and circumstances were at the time this document was allegedly negotiated and executed."

It will take an evidentiary hearing, he said, to resolve the matter of Herman's signature on the agreement.

However, when pressed, Hodas stopped short of saying Herman's signature on the agreement was not hers.

Woods’ attorney, J.B. Murray, of West Palm Beach, who declined to comment after court, countered that the authenticity argument "is a bit of a red herring.

Tiger Woods, shown during the second round of The Masters on April 8, 2023.
Tiger Woods, shown during the second round of The Masters on April 8, 2023.

"One thing you did not hear Mr. Hodas say is that she did not sign it," Murray argued. "They have two points: She does not recall signing it. And she's not familiar with the form of the document. They're not bold enough to come and tell you, she did not sign it."

Murray said Herman’s lawyers failed to prove the agreement wasn’t valid and based on its terms, the court should order the matter to private arbitration.

Murray noted Woods signed a declaration authenticating his signature on the agreement, and that he also recognized Herman's signature on the NDA.

"That alone is sufficient to authenticate the document," Murray said.

Sexual harassment allegation

After several years together, Woods broke up with Herman in October, according to court records.

She stated he had her locked out of the Jupiter Island mansion they shared, leading her to claim more than $30 million in damages.

Herman also has accused Woods of sexual harassment, saying he pursued a sexual relationship with her when she was his employee and then forced her to sign a non-disclosure agreement about it – or be fired from her job if she did not, according to documents Hodas filed on Friday.

“Mr. Woods was Ms. Herman’s boss," Hodas said in the court filing. "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 has filed two lawsuits – one from October against the homestead trust that Woods established for his home and another in March against Woods himself.

The latter lawsuit doesn’t seek monetary damages. It instead seeks to release her from her NDA with Woods under the federal Ending Forced Arbitration Act, a law that says NDAs aren’t enforceable in certain cases of sexual assault and harassment.

Hodas in court said there were "issues that we have not filed with the court yet, facts that involve the sexual harassment prong of the EFAA."

"Unfortunately because of this (NDA) document, we've just been very careful on what allegations we make to the court that we put in writing," he said. "We don't want to run afoul of any of those provisions."

Without elaborating, Hodas noted "there is a dispute, not necessarily a claim" of sexual harassment.

Murray though, argued that Herman's lawyers failed to meet the federal pleading standards required to pass a plausibility test regarding a claim of sexual harassment under the (federal Ending Forced Arbitration) Act.

"That EFAA statute needs to be applied with caution," he told Metzger.

After court, Hodas declined to discuss Herman's sexual harassment allegations against Woods.

This story will be updated.

USA Today contributed to this report.

Melissa E. Holsman is the legal affairs reporter for TCPalm and Treasure Coast Newspapers and is writer and co-host of  Uncertain Terms, a true crime podcast. Reach her at  melissa.holsman@tcpalm.com.  If you are a subscriber, thank you. If not, become a subscriber to get the latest local news on the Treasure Coast.

This article originally appeared on Treasure Coast Newspapers: Tiger Woods, Erica Herman lawyers argue in court over NDA; ruling soon