Getty Images
At first glance, the Houston Texans’ decision to settle for a woman who had sued the team for alleged misconduct by former Marshal Deshaun Watson and 29 others who had not yet sued him has no impact on Watson. . Claims against him, four still pending and, according to the Houston agreement, up to six that could still sue him, are not affected. At a deeper level, there are pros and cons to the Houston liquidation.
The good news is that if / when the cases against the Texans go to trial, Watson will not be dragged into this litigation as a witness. He would have been potentially interrogated under oath before each trial (in the form of a deposition), and would certainly have been called to testify at each and every one of the trials. Even if she had resolved all pending cases against him at the time, she would have faced harsh interrogations from attorney Tony Buzbee and possibly the team’s attorney, based on the specific defenses developed and asserted. before a jury. The team could have tried to prove that Watson did nothing wrong, and in turn, the team did nothing wrong. The team, in turn, could have tried to blame it all on Watson, who is the one who should have been prosecuted for compensation for any crime.
Along these same lines, the settlement avoids what would have been a very awkward dynamic. If the cases against the Texans had been filed directly against the team and not added to the existing cases (this is how the former was filed), the Texans would have added Watson to the cases as a third defendant when they formally responded. at each lawsuit, arguing that Watson is responsible for any alleged damage, not the equipment. The headline could easily have been, “Jeans sue Deshaun Watson.” Jeans ’settlements avoid this procedural complication.
The bad news is that, for the four pending cases and the six additional potentials, the agreements will help fund the ongoing litigation. While the amount is unknown and may never be, any amount paid to women who continue to sue or will sue Watson can be used to help pay the costs in the four cases still pending against him. It could also encourage those who have rejected liquidation offers to stand even firmer in their positions and insist on having a public trial.
At this point, Watson and his attorneys may be entitled to know within the limits of the pending cases the amounts paid by the Texans. The Texans and Buzbee would surely fight that effort. Watson, through his attorneys, can argue that the information could be relevant to the remaining litigation and is therefore a fair match for the discovery process. If the settlements are low, the potential argument would be that it shows that the cases are weak. If the deals are high, Watson could try to get a dollar-for-dollar credit against any verdict handed down against him. Again, the team and Buzbee would surely fight any attempt to enter the settlement amounts in an open court.
It is still a two-edged sword for Watson. The more they pay for the jeans, the more it seems like there was a reason to pay. That the Texans had known about Watson’s alleged offense and couldn’t stop him. That Watson had indeed committed himself to misconduct.
Regardless, the conclusion is that the situation, which was about to become hopelessly complicated by up to 30 new lawsuits against the Texans, has been simplified. From an NFL perspective, this is good news. He guarantees that once the remaining cases against Watson are over, this prolonged distraction will finally end.