Lawsuit Against Paula Deen Dismissed!

paula2Last Monday a U.S. District Court judge threw out the racial discrimination portion of the lawsuit against Paula Deen that continues to threaten her career. Now, the remainder of the lawsuit has also been dismissed.

In a document filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Savannah, the remaining charges were dismissed. According to CBS, “both sides agreed to drop the lawsuit without any award of costs or fees to any party.” No other details of the agreement were released. The judge in the case had not signed an order to finalize the dismissal. 

Paula Deen had recently replaced her entire legal team. Her new attorneys stated that Jackson’s suit was based on “scurrilous and false claims.” They also allege that Jackson repeatedly threatened to embarrass Deen publicly unless she paid the ex-employee “huge sums of money” which some sources quoted to be in excess of `12 million dollars.

Paula made a statement about the nightmare she and her family have been enduring today. “While this has been a difficult time for both my family and myself, I am pleased that the judge dismissed the race claims and I am looking forward to getting this behind me, now that the remaining claims have been resolved. Those who truly know how I live my life know that I believe in kindness and fairness for everyone.”

Paula also addressed the working conditions of her business stating, “Moving forward my team and I are working to review the workplace environment issues that were raised in this matter and to retool all of my businesses operations. I look forward to getting back to doing what I love.” I am going to go out on a limb and guess that she is going to force Bubba into retirement.


Filed under lawsuit, Paula Deen

38 responses to “Lawsuit Against Paula Deen Dismissed!

  1. so my guess is they must have paid her off. my lawsuit was resolved that way. the main person i was suing was dismissed from the lawsuit, the remainder were kept on the lawsuit, then the lawsuit was dismissed and technically my settlement was with the remainder and not the main party so he could avoid liability. sucked but sometimes you have to let go. i know you are happy about this tho i am conflicted. as far as i’m concerned, tho, the only ones who benefit from a lawsuit are the liars–i mean lawyers.

  2. oops i mean i agreed to remove the first defendant from the lawsuit. he wasn’t dismissed from it, we just filed paperwork to remove his name from the suit. damn, wish we could edit our comments.
    i hope this truly means things will be better for the employees who were actually harmed by the business. the kitchen staff seemed to have been treated abominably.

    • You sure have a lot of knowledge about this case that is not in any court document that has been proven to be true.

      • Manuel

        ITA with Tamara. This don’t add up and I’m wondering if politics wasn’t the real culprit here. Every white Southerner by birth and over the age of 60 has a very high probability of having said that word. and the word is now thrown around by young ‘uns like it’s nothin. This stinks worse than Brooks’ breath on Sunday morning.

        I am happy that poor lady was vindicated in some way.

      • jakies mom

        TT, based on the wording is how one knows and those in law are stating that this was a settlement.. It is all in the wording of the ,specifics aside.. The case was dismissed not dropped. . Dropped, means one party gave up in the suit and it was dropped without consequences to the other party. Dismissed is what a judge does (the parties can’t dismiss a lawsuit). Settled is an agreement of the two parties to not continue and the plaintiff agrees to ask the Court to dismiss the suit if the defendant does something (usually pay money). Paula has agreed to address the workplace problems which she said in her public statement.. The judge was happy and dismissed the case.And everyone moves on.

  3. Tango

    Good for Paula.

  4. Gingersnap

    So the witch hunt has resolved itself. I’m glad for Paula. She definitely needs to unload Bubba, brother or not. He’s a liability.

  5. Thank you, Tamara. Now we need the same media that lynched her (yep, I used that on purpose) to untie the knots and make it good. Bet not…

  6. smitsa

    What am I missing. She settled out of court. That’s not a win.

    • reading comprehension skills? I bolded the important parts…

      • tamara, some of the bold stuff is quite common in these types of cases. we are entitled to our own opinions, right? clearly we’re coming from different places re this. your photo choice is priceless, tho.

      • Shellbelle

        I just can’t… Tamara, I don’t know how you do it sometimes. You’ve stated the obvious twice now in comments..

      • Smitsa

        Tamara, please research more. You are correct in your bolded statement, but you missed the reason for the agreements.

      • You are basing that on TMZ saying “They maybe/probably/settled out of court? but there is no wy to know?” I think you need to understand what research IS.

      • smitsa

        Nope, using TMZ as a reference would be totally idiotic. I’m sure you’re not calling me that. Research means, to do an “extensive” investigation or inquiry into a subject to discover or revise the facts. You gave partial information. Simply because you TT “bolded” what you perceived as the important parts, doesn’t me I don’t understand what you wrote. I didn’t write, have, or “bold” all the facts.
        Mine is not to do the “research” for everyone who reads the blog, but simply to add my 2 cents. My research shows, there was a settlement, thus it was not necessary to continue with the lawsuit procedures.

      • Tango

        But we don’t know for sure if a settlement was paid and what that would have been.

    • my THEORY is that the new lawyers offered not to sue her for blackmail if she would walk away.

  7. Tim

    What I get from reading the parts in bold is that neither party is awarded any costs or fees which translates into neither party is responsible for the others court costs or attorney fess. Nowhere in any news article does it state that the plaintiff didn’t receive a settlement. All the press releases very plainly do not state anywhere that no damages were awarded or no settlement agreed on. The whole statement is clearly worded to make it sound like she was vindicated when in reality she probably offered a sizable settlement on the condition of a gag order on acceptance.

    • Tango

      I think that could be seen as a win though, it shows that the plantiff didn’t think they had a strong enough case to win in court, and Paula gets to end it. I guess it’s all in how you look at it.


      • Tango

        Agreed TT. It’s sad how you can be ruined by an unproven claim, just because it pertains to race. We are supposed to live in a country where you get a chance to defend yourself.

      • JustUsForAll

        TT, you know… Corporations do not need judicial conclusions to “why” they make PR decisions when they dump someone. Again, it’s all in the PR strategies As powerful as the Banks or Wall Street – even they could NOT indure bad press for very long, least the minnions pull their money out all at once – Ouch ! I still argue, Ms. Deen, Inc. should have settled this one on the QT, out of the public eye as quickly as possible or risk suffering a wrath of backlash, especially if it was politically charged. > Who was making those decisions ? Whoever did, rolled the dice & came up snake-eyes. Not all bad PR is better than NO PR. “Old Tricks – New Dogs!” Does Deen offer public stock ? Doubtful, if any sponsorship will risk their PR to climb back aboard. A good indicator of pending trouble usually is when you have to fire your entire legal team & made public your need to re-organize ! Ah, yes, The Image & the Image Makers Still Rule ! ~ It’s all on Mad-ison Ave. !

    • JustUsForAll

      That sounds about right… Settlements are just THAT – settlements ! Stipulations added or omitted as to the state of each parties agreement, sometimes @ the recommendations of the presiding Judge, as well. To pay or not to pay, (amounts ?) to admit responsibility or neutrality, etc, etc.. To disclose or not to disclose is always the “biggy” in (company) settlements – as not to impose further impunities against each party. IMO, this should have been done in the first place but is the ultimate decision of the plaintiff forehand and the defendant to counter.

  8. Brillke

    So glad this was dismissed.

  9. Loose lips sink ships and haven’t we all had floppy lips at one time or another. I think Paula would like to rethink/redo a few things. Wouldn’t we all. And haven’t we all been slandered or taken our of context or just plain quoted when we should have been more discrete or just got carried away in the heat of the moment. I think Paula’s a pretty decent person all around. It does sound like some blackmailing and maybe some harrassing. What woman hasn’t been harrassed at work in one way or another. I think how quickly sponsors jumped the gun was a little on the excessive side.

  10. JustUsForAll

    *Shrimping boat for Bubba… *New med’s for Paula ! *Start the fryers ! and 86 those new waitress uniforms for Ch___st’s sake !!!

  11. liz

    Use of the “N” word is not the crux of the allegation. While certainly that is not a positive….the allegations are based on Paula knowledge and allowance of her brother’s harassment and hostile work environment issues. Please read “Under Cover Lawyer:…The Hostile Environment that Brought Down Paula Deen”.

  12. liz

    The Undercover Lawyer piece is a website on the internet.

  13. April

    Sounds to me Ms Jackson didn’t get the big payday she was hoping for. I smell blackmail.

Please Read the COMMENTING RULES before commenting.