Nicollette Sheridan’s Case Over ‘Desperate Housewives’ Firing Dismissed

Nicollette Sheridan
Gregg DeGuire/WireImage

A judge has dismissed actress Nicollette Sheridan’s long-running lawsuit against ABC over her firing from the hit series “Desperate Housewives.”

Judge Michael Stern ruled Friday that Sheridan’s case couldn’t proceed because the actress should have exhausted her claims to a labor commissioner before pursuing a trial.

Sheridan was seeking a re-trial on her claim that she was fired from “Desperate Housewives” because she complained that the show’s creator Marc Cherry hit her on the head in 2008 on the set.

A jury in 2012 deadlocked 8-4 in Sheridan’s favor that ABC had retaliated against Sheridan.

Adam Levin, an attorney for ABC, said the network was pleased with the ruling.

Sheridan’s lawyers say they plan to appeal.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 7

Leave a Reply

7 Comments

Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Katrina says:

    She did not prove her case to the jury or she would have won at trial. The fact that 1st judge excused Cherry from the case, after the two witnesses who were there when it went down testified, shows Sheridan had credibility problems. The fact that immediately after this “terrible thing” happened to her she spent about 45 minutes checking her e-mail and then later went shopping and to lunch with a friend – who was NEVER called as a witness (after the fact – state of mind, etc.) says a lot. The fact she spent a year looking for a lawyer is also telling. She was turned down time after time as each lawyer took a look at the “evidence” she had vs.what ABC had. Her lawyers are NOT working on spec! This stupid cow has paid them a million plus at this point so of course they are more than happy to appeal. I hope she spends even more and at the end of the day gets nothing but older and poorer. I know its more sexy to think of her as the victim since she is a beautiful woman but it does not change the fact that the man did not “wallop” her in anger as she has so falsely claimed.

  2. malcolm says:

    Strange this ..the case has been dismissed for a technical reason even though she proved her case to a jury so surely if she goes back to a labor commissioner she probably going to get a judgement in her favour,how even if the commissioner rules against her that means she will then have “exhausted her claims” and will then resume the case in court.. so what im having a hard time with is why Adam Levin, an attorney for ABC is so pleased with this verdict as it will mean even higher cost against ABC when it eventually returns to court…
    OH wait i just realised he`s a lawyer he gets paid whether ABC wins or loses … :)

  3. joe says:

    then why didn’t the judge at the first trial tell her that instead of letting everybody waste their time and money?

  4. joe says:

    typical bought and paid for judge to say she can’t have a trial yet after she already had one.

    • Jackson says:

      Are you a legal expert? The judge says she should have exhausted her claims to a labor commissioner before ever going to trial.

      Since you claim the judge was bought and paid for, give us the legal reasons why his ruling isn’t accurate.

      Go ahead, show how much (or little) you know.

      (crickets)

      Yeah, that’s what I thought.

More TV News from Variety

Loading