This is from Reuters:
"The duty to mitigate clause requires him (James) to attempt to find a new job, stating, "Once terminated, Coach is obligated to diligently search for and make a good faith effort to obtain another position appropriate for his skill set and to provide the university upon request with evidence that he is seeking such employment." That clause also requires the 53-year-old Franklin "to make good faith efforts to obtain the maximum reasonable salary" at his new job."
This duty is widely reported, though I personally doubt it will ever be an issue in that Franklin is not wired to sit on a beach or go to a TV studio where he has no skin in the game. Sure, when you are 65+ and you have tapped out, these may be options, but not when you are a competitive person at the prime of his coaching career. Competitors at the prime of their life do not retire to sit on a beach or sit in a studio talking about what they believe the can compete at at the highest level. If I am an Olympic level fencer I do not retire at my prime to sit on the beach or talk about fencing on TV. Where is the juice in that? But if people don't get this, no way to explain it. You go to the sidelines where you have zero skin in the game when you tap out, and James has not. He will take a job, What he can or cannot accomplish will be up to him to determine. I think VTech would be a great spot for him. Less pressure, able to recruit well, and has coaches and players from PSU to set a decent foundation. It would something analogous to Kiffin when he went to FAU to rehab his reputation.
An interesting development last night was that LSU is now alleging that Brian K was fired "for cause" and that there is no money due him. In turn Kelley has filed a law suit against the state of LA, which even if he wins (he will) has 300m judgements against it that will never be paid out. Surely this a negotiating tactic. Having said that, when language in contracts establish a duty to mitigate, failure to do so may very well set up long term litigation.