Big Picture

Charlize: Cool With Colbert Plus, Jessica Alba wins big and Cynthia Nixon takes in some family time. Get all the latest pics!

MORE PHOTOS +
Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player.

Our Partners

Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player.

UPDATE!

Judge: Rob's Nanny Should've Kept It On Down-Lowe

Rob Lowe Todd Williamson/Getty Images

That's one small step for Rob Lowe, one giant step for celeb kind. Nearly.

Thanks to an important legal victory in the actor's ongoing Nannygate travails, good help—specifically, good quiet help—may be getting a little less hard to find in Hollywood.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis on Friday denied former nanny Laura Boyce's request to dismiss the Lowes' breach-of-contract suit against her, allowing the couple's case against her to move forward.

While it was widely reported this morning that the judge made the decision based on her opposition to Boyce's claim that the confidentiality agreement she willingly signed upon her employ violated her right to free speech—in particular, her right to rat out her former employers for allegedly walking around nude in their own home, making untoward sexual comments and freely discussing their boudoir behavior—attorney Gloria Allred has a different take on the legal defeat...

View the minute order

"The judge did not say that the confidentiality agreement was valid or invalid," Allred told E! News. "The validity of the agreement would be decided at a later time."

"We alleged that the confidentiality agreement was void as against public policy because California Labor Code Section 232.5 makes it illegal for an employer to require as a condition of employment, that an employee refrain from disclosing information about the employee's working conditions."

When the decision as to the validity of a confidentiality agreement is made, it will theoretically set a precedent in determing whether celebs will feel more confident about conducting their private life in, well, private, without fear of legal retaliation—and public airing of laundry—by their staff.

Prior to today's decision, arguments were made by both sides to determine whether Rob and Sheryl Lowe's lawsuit against Boyce should be allowed to proceed. The couple, married since 1991, filed a complaint against the former nanny back in April of last year, alleging breach of contract, defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress and intentional misrepresentation.

"This is not something that occurred in an office building, but in the privacy of a home," the Lowes' attorney, Stanton L. Stein, said in court last month, adding that Boyce signed the confidentiality agreement of her own volition.

As for the onetime helper, Boyce has long maintained that the lawsuit was filed against her preemptively after her former employers discovered she had spoken with a lawyer about her working conditions. She claims her First Amendment rights have since been violated.

"To allow the Lowes' complaint to proceed would send a message to potential witnesses such as Ms. Boyce that they can't talk about labor conditions or they might get sued," her attorney, Dolores Leal, said.

Thanks to last week's decision, the Lowes' lawsuit against Boyce will continue as planned. Boyce's countersuit, filed against the Lowes shortly after their filing last year, is still pending.

7 Comments

Now loading...

Add Your Comment!

Guests

E! Online members

Register | Forgot password?

Play nice and have fun. And please, no HTML tags or special characters including [&*#()!@$].
You've got 1000 characters left.

Post Comment