- 22 -
complaint was going to be filed, and no agreement would be
reached.
That evening, petitioner spoke to Mr. Bauer. After speaking
to Mr. Bauer, petitioner felt he had a stronger case against UTA.
Mr. Bauer told petitioner that he was never consulted about
firing petitioner, nothing about the situation was handled
appropriately, UTA had defamed petitioner, he was considering
suing UTA as well, and he believed that petitioner had not
harassed Ms. Jones.
Negotiations continued after the April 23 meeting. Mr.
Dunham indicated that UTA wanted to resolve the matter and gave
Mr. Ostroff and Sidley Austin permission to speak directly to Mr.
Berkus. Mr. Dunham felt comfortable with Mr. Berkus’s ability to
negotiate a deal with petitioner’s attorneys. Mr. Berkus’s
business was the negotiation of deals, and the issue to be
negotiated was financial (i.e., how much to pay petitioner for
each cause of action).
Mr. Berkus negotiated directly with Mr. Ostroff and Ms.
Dillman. Petitioner made a counterproposal of $9.25 million, and
UTA countered with $4 million. These monetary demands were
accompanied by additional terms. Petitioner wanted Jay Sures (an
agent at UTA) released from his contract, an apology and
retraction, the ability to compete with UTA, vacation pay, and
his personal effects that were still in UTA’s offices. UTA
wanted a noncompete agreement, a nonsolicitation agreement, and a
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011