The Louisiana Supreme Court ruled Friday that former LSU Head Football Coach must give half of his $17 million buyout to his ex-wife, Kelly.
Orgeron coached the Tigers when they won the national championship for the 2019 season. LSU extended his contract in early 2020. Orgeron and LSU agreed to a buyout clause. However, the Cajun coach was unable to duplicate his success as the football team's performance fell off a cliff. LSU fired Orgeron in 2021 and paid Orgeron $17 million. However, there was the matter of the ex-wife, who claimed she was entitled to half of the buyout amount.
Kelly Orgeron sued and lost as Ed Orgeron successfully argued she deserved no share of the buyout since it was paid after the divorce. Kelly did not take her ball and go home but instead appealed.
It is said timing is everything and such is the case in well, this case. The Court held:
The liquidated damages were a contractual benefit guaranteed to the defendant by his employer, which became effective on January 14, 2020, forty-three (43) days before the defendant filed a petition for divorce on February 26, 2020....
The lower courts failed to recognize that even if the Employment Agreement could be considered a “new” obligation rather than a fulfillment of the requirements of the Binding Term Sheet, because it was made effective during the existence of the community, the contract is a community asset in which both husband and wife have an interest.
This particular passage spelled doom for Ed Orgeron:
The liquidated damages clause was one all parties likely hoped would never be used. But it had its value as a type of insurance, a security blanket, if you will, or a “golden parachute.” The coach, and his wife, were given the comfort, the assurance, the confidence, and the peace of mind, that even if his coaching was terribly unsuccessful, or even if for other reasons that could not be labeled as “for cause,” the school felt the need to part ways, he would not do so empty handed. This comfort and peace of mind inured to the benefit of both husband and wife in the college football coaching business. Because this security blanket was provided for in the Employment Agreement, effective during the community, it was community property as would be any other community asset.
The Court ruled 5-2 in favor of Kelly Orgeron. Ed Orgeron's attorney, Randy Smith, said he will seek a re-hearing from the Court.
33 comments:
Louisiana is a community property state and this ruling will not be overturned. In my best Coach O impersonation I say “Go Kelly.”
Serves him right. He pulled some horrible stuff with his previous wife too.
this is why I was only married once and now spend my retirement whoremongering in Thailand and Vietnam.
How are those lady boys?
A blind man could have seen that ruling coming.
This is why men should not get married. Too much liability.
Lol
He needs to remarry her
What can a married man do that a single man can’t do????
Whoa baby. Louisiana is will say different. She can go after him even after she remarries
Why in the world did the sitting Justices recuse themselves? Tiger fans that cannot be impartial? If so, good for them, but that is strange.
If Coach O has already paid taxes on this, paid his attorneys, and now has to pay his ex-wife, would there be much left of the $17 million?
Hoo gives a rat's? FOO-BAW...FOO...BAW.
Git dat gat
Somebody play NECK
....and women want "equality".
Good luck with getting that ruling overturned. The best thing he can do is smile, hand her the money and move on with his life. I know from experience.
Will this encourage him to get back into coaching?
Regardless of one’s opinion of him, he brings an added element of entertainment to the holy game of college football, one of most important things of American culture.
kingfish1935@gmail.com
He's one of the few recruiters on the same level as you know who.
“It’s cheaper to keep her.”
- Johnnie Taylor
So he ends up with more than 8 million instead of 17 million. I wouldn't call it a tragedy.
4:04 pm Coach gets to pay lots of money to his accountant and tax attorney to file amended returns for this mess. He will get a big tax refund for the lower income but not sure when his ex has to recognize the income. Avoid tax attorneys if possible as they have a grossly exaggerated opinion of themselves. They pad their billable hours by constantly “reviewing” the file and claiming they need to research even common issues.
Several of you, including the Blog Wizard, need to learn basic math.
OK, students, what is 17 divided by 2?
Now, what is 17 X 1/2?
Lastly, what is 50% of 17?
Bonus Question: If John has 17 apples and cuts each of them in half and divides the halves into two equal piles...and he gives me one of the piles, how many are in my pile and how many are in John's pile?
And a CFB Natty
GTHOM
It's called rounding. She actually gets $8.1 million but I rounded down for simplicity's sake. The actual percentage is 47%, almost half so rounded up. This is not hard.
Bonus Question: If John has 17 apples and cuts each of them in half and divides the halves into two equal piles...and he gives me one of the piles, how many are in my pile and how many are in John's pile?
June 30, 2025 at 6:57 AM
Where did John Come From??? Is He The Pool Boy, or Ex Wife's New Boyfriend, or Even the Coaches Boy Friend???
6:57 are you proud of yourself and your mathematical deductive genius? It's impressive how you were able to post that while patting yourself on the back for coming up with such a sick burn. Next you'll tell me a parsec is a unit of distance and not time.
If it's true that the total available amount was 17 million and each gets half, then none of your figures is correct, even if rounded.
Out of the 17 Million, how much do the lawyers get?
Yet again proof that only a fool marries
almost to the jj gold standard of 50. nothing sets the asses of the beautiful people of the SEC on fire like a former ole miss , [gawd forbid, ] football coach up in some drugs , sex ,and roc an roll.....................and most of all money...........................something all the beautiful people of the SEC always pretend to have , but rarely possess.
to 8:39.............of course 8:39 hates lawyers. why else would he ask such a question .
all the pretty people out the hate lawyers cause they contend they ''rob'' people.
you can bet your last buck that 8;39 is just one more broke goofball.
my question to you 8:39, why are you worried about losing money to a lawyer when money is something you dont have in the first place?
When the contract was signed, Ed and Kelly were "they." EOD. The tax situation could and likely will get interesting for both and neither will probably like what happens on that front. Yet another reason why settling these things with a rational overview of all economic ramifications would have been cheaper and easier for both litigants.
Post a Comment