You need evidence to allege "termination for cause" or else it's defamation.

It appears that Governor Landry or his minions thought LSU could float rumors of reasons to terminate for cause in an effort to aid buyout negotiations. They seem to have thought that the rumors would provide leverage that would decrease Kelly's demand. Perhaps he/they figured that LSU did not really need an actual reason to terminate for cause, let alone evidence to support those allegations. "We just gonna put it out there to make Kelly squirm and negotiate."

The problem is that Kelly's attorneys questioned whether LSU actually intended to assert allegations to support a termination for cause. When LSU failed to concede the issue, Kelly's attorneys decided to let the 19th JDC decide if there was sufficient evidence. If LSU does not concede the issue or if they don't have any evidence, there's going to be a defamation lawsuit and possibly a claim for tortious interference with contract.


It seems that at every conceivable inflection point, Landry or his minions have failed to plan ahead.

It doesn't look like anyone calculated whether it was cheaper to keep him for some length of time, a week, a month, the remainder of the season, etc.

It doesn't look like anyone calculated how LSU was going to fund the payout.

It doesn't look like anyone analyzed, prior to his termination, whether LSU could terminate Kelly with cause.

It doesn't look like anyone gave any thought about a replacement head coach before terminating Kelly.

In short, the whole thing looks like it was handled by a five-year-old child who just wanted to have his way.