Introduction

The recent cancellation of the Roseanne TV show due to offensive tweets by Roseanne Barr has raised the intriguing question: can co-stars sue her for lost earnings?

Legal Angle: Seeking Compensation

Some might argue that the other cast members and network executives should sue Roseanne Barr and the network. This scenario imagines a lawsuit where aggrieved actors and the network would seek financial recompense for lost salaries and potential future earnings related directly to the Roseanne show. Historically, under similar circumstances, such litigation could follow.

Contractual and Practical Constraints

However, the reality of the situation presents significant obstacles.

The contracts signed by Roseanne Barr, her co-stars, and the network almost certainly include a force majeure clause. This legal provision protects parties from being held responsible for events beyond their reasonable control, such as cancellation due to controversial content or a change in public sentiment.

Renowned for its staunch opposition to legal disputes, Hollywood tends to avoid lawsuits at all costs. The star-studded (and star-struck) industry is reluctant to tarnish reputations, especially when it comes to talent involved in high-profile shows. Similar to the John Goodman lawsuit, which ultimately damaged his career, other cast members would be unwise to follow suit.

The show's production company and network are planning to "Frankenstein" a new series using all the major characters but excluding Roseanne Barr. This new show is set to have a limited runtime, ensuring the cast has a minimal chance for sustained financial gain under these circumstances. Pursuing a lawsuit would not only delay this fleeting opportunity but also alienate key stakeholders in the entertainment industry.

Conclusion: Practical Benefits of Not Suing

Given the force majeure clause, the practical obligations of Hollywood, and the fleeting nature of the new show, it is highly unlikely that the remaining cast members would pursue legal action against Roseanne Barr. Adhering to this course of action would allow them a glimmer of financial security and avoid the risk of damaging their careers further.