Judge gives sacked editor his job back in amazing Philadelphia feud
A judge has ordered the immediate reinstatement of sacked Philadelphia Inquirer editor William Marimow.
Welcome back hug for fired editor
The paper itself reported that the firing that exposed "deep divisions" among the newspaper's millionaire owners and sparked an ugly public battle for control of its parent company.
Judge Patricia McInerney declared that Marimow's Oct. 7 firing violated the contract rights of Lewis Katz, one of two co-owners who opposed his dismissal.
George Norcross III, who leads a rival faction of owners and became a defendant in the lawsuit vowed to appeal.
Norcross and the three other partners said in a statement that restoring Marimow would reignite the stalemate among owners and lead to "chaos" or paralysis for Interstate General Media.
With nearly 1,800 employees, the company also operates the Philadelphia Daily News and Philly.com.
Marimow, 66, arrived in the Inquirer newsroom shortly before 5 p.m. on Friday to cheers, applause, and hugs from the staff, the Inquirer reported.
"Bill, where have you been?" quipped sports editor John Quinn.
In an interview, Marimow praised Katz, Lenfest, and their lawyer, Richard A. Sprague, and said he was committed to "a vigorous, independent" news organization.
"This is the only job I ever really wanted after I left reporting," said Marimow, who won two Pulitzer Prizes as a reporter for The Inquirer and had two previous stints as its editor, the last starting in May 2012. "It is great to be back."
Publisher Robert J. Hall fired Marimow after he claimed Marimow refused to implement changes to the paper and oust certain staffers. Hall could not be reached for comment, said the paper.
The judge's ruling exposed the feud among six millionaires who paid $55 million and formed the company last year.
Katz claimed Marimow's dismissal was a breach of the partnership contract that called for him and Norcross, as managing partners, to jointly approve all major business decisions at the company.
Norcross insisted the publisher had unfettered authority to hire and fire the editor, and that Katz had broken their agreement by meddling in newsroom affairs.
In her five-page ruling, the judge said "Mr. Katz had a clear right to vote on the firing of Mr. Marimow."
Katz said he was heartened by the decision but knew it would not end the dispute.
"It's really time now to come up with the best way to either bring this partnership together or break it apart," he said. "Nobody really wins whenever you get involved in a family squabble."
Katz said it was time to look for "the best way forward" for the company. It was unclear what that way will be, said the Inquirer