Photo Credit: Juliana Romão
Live Nation hopes to dismiss the $35 million lawsuit filed against it , shrugging it off as little more than a resentful former employee misunderstanding financial documents.
Live Nation has responded to the lawsuit filed against it earlier this year by an ex-employee with claims of financial impropriety and fraud—something the company is shrugging off as little more than a misunderstanding of financial documents.
The $35 million lawsuit was filed by former Live Nation Executive Vice President of Development and Business Practice Nicholas Rumanes in Los Angeles County Superior Court back in April. Notably, that was just a week after a New York jury found Live Nation and Ticketmaster guilty of having illegally monopolized the event ticketing market for years.
Rumanes’ lawsuit alleges that he was wrongfully terminated after raising concerns about what he described as improper accounting practices and deliberate financial misconduct within the company.
Now, Live Nation claims Rumanes did not raise any of his allegations during his employment, but only after the company opted not to renew his contract.
“His contract was not renewed after failing to meet expectations. He did not raise these allegations during his employment, only doing so months after his departure, and an independent investigation found no evidence to support them. We will respond through the appropriate legal process,” said Live Nation.
The company also argued that Rumanes “did not uncover fraud,” and his case only “demonstrated what amounts to a basic misunderstanding of what [various financial documents and statements] are and how a public company uses them.”
Among his claims, Rumanes says he was recruited away from another executive position in 2022 to Live Nation before being fired last year. His attorneys assert that he was hired by Live Nation under false pretenses, and the role he was asked to perform differed significantly from the position he was initially offered.
Though Live Nation is hoping to have the case dismissed, the live events giant is alternatively trying to move the matter into private/confidential arbitration. The company argues that its employment contract is confidential and therefore the dispute should be moved out of the public court docket and into a private tribunal.
However, given the lawsuit’s proximity to the outcome of the United States’ antitrust case against Live Nation, the presiding judge in Los Angeles may find ample reason to keep this case open.
