Howard Stern Beats Former Executive Assistant’s Lawsuit Looking to Void NDA
A New York court has thrown out a lawsuit brought by Howard Stern's former executive assistant, Leslie Kuhn, who had sought to void a nondisclosure agreement covering her time working for the radio host and his wife. Justice Melissa Crane ruled the 2025 NDA was valid, finding that Kuhn had knowingly agreed to its terms, undermining her claim that she never signed it. The ruling matters because it blocks Kuhn from publicising allegations she had made about a hostile workplace linked to an animal rescue organisation run by Stern's wife.
Kuhn was hired by SiriusXM in 2022 as an office manager for The Howard Stern Show before being moved to Stern's production company, One Twelve, as his executive assistant, where she was paid over $190,000 over nine months. She was dismissed earlier this year and, disputing the authenticity of both a 2022 confidentiality agreement and the 2025 NDA, sued in April. The court cited an email in which Kuhn wrote "Signed NDA attached" as evidence she had consented, and rejected her claim that One Twelve had hacked her computer to forge the signature. Stern, who had branded the suit a "shakedown", failed to secure sanctions against Kuhn, with the judge finding no evidence of bad faith on her part.
- Court dismisses Howard Stern assistant's bid to void her NDA.
- Judge ruled Kuhn had knowingly signed the 2025 agreement.
- Stern's sanctions request against Kuhn was also denied.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Advocates of the ruling argue that contract law requires enforceability when there is clear evidence of consent, particularly given Kuhn's email stating 'Signed NDA attached' which directly contradicts her subsequent claims of never signing. They contend that NDAs serve legitimate purposes in protecting business secrets and confidential information, and note that the judgment was carefully reasoned—the judge found no bad faith on Kuhn's part and declined to impose sanctions. From this perspective, upholding such contracts preserves rule of law and enables companies to operate with confidence that their confidential information is protected.
The case against
Critics contend that employment NDAs create problematic power imbalances between workers and employers, particularly when they prevent workers from discussing workplace conditions and potential misconduct. In Kuhn's case, the enforced silence prevents disclosure of allegations regarding a hostile work environment, raising questions about whether such agreements should be enforceable when they suppress matters affecting employee welfare. From this view, NDAs have increasingly become tools for suppressing legitimate scrutiny rather than merely protecting genuine trade secrets, and their broad enforcement undermines accountability and workers' ability to speak about their experiences.