Steve Easterbrook, then-chief executive officer of McDonald’s Corp., speaks during the opening of the company’s new headquarters in Chicago, Illinois, on Monday, June 4, 2018.
Joshua Lott | Bloomberg | Getty Images
McDonald’s slammed former CEO Steve Easterbrook in a new legal filing on Monday, arguing that he should have to defend his conduct in court.
More than two weeks ago, Easterbrook asked the Delaware court to dismiss the case against him from his former employer, who is suing him to recoup his severance package after allegedly discovering that he had sexual relationships with three additional women while at McDonald’s.
The company’s board ousted Easterbrook in November and awarded him a severance package with an estimated value of tens of millions of dollars after he acknowledged an affair with an employee but denied additional sexual relationships. The separation agreement also included some benefits for McDonald’s, like non-compete and nondisparagement clauses, which Easterbrook’s attorney pointed out in his request for dismissal of the case.
“Easterbrook’s suggestion that, his lies notwithstanding, McDonald’s got a good enough deal by ridding itself of him has no legal merit,” McDonald’s responded in the filing.
In arguing for a dismissal of the case, Easterbrook claimed that McDonald’s had the “new” information about his alleged relationships the entire time. Easterbrook allegedly deleted emails containing evidence of those relationships on his phone, yet they still lived on the company’s servers.
McDonald’s said in its Monday court filing that Easterbrook’s argument boils down to “he cannot be liable because, as a matter of law, he did not hide his misconduct well enough.”
Easterbrook’s attorney did not respond to a request for comment from CNBC.
“When McDonald’s investigated, Steve Easterbrook lied. He violated the Company’s policies, disrespected its values, and abused the trust of his co-workers, the Board, our franchisees, and our shareholders,” McDonald’s said in a statement to CNBC. “His argument that he should not be held responsible for even repeated bad acts is morally bankrupt and fails under the law.”