News Sports
Former head football coach Brian Smith sues Ohio University alleging wrongful termination
By: David Forster
Posted on:
ATHENS, Ohio (WOUB) — Ohio University’s former head football coach has filed a lawsuit claiming he was let go without a formal investigation into allegations that he denies.
The university terminated Brian Smith’s contract in December, citing alleged extramarital affairs, including one with an undergraduate student, and alcohol use on campus.
In a lawsuit he filed Friday morning, Smith argues the allegations against him “were never adjudicated, never proven, and never subjected to the fair and contractual process OU promised.”
“This was not a mistake. It was a choice,” the lawsuit alleges. “Ohio University chose expedience over fairness, optics over truth, and institutional self-protection over contractual obligation.”
Smith was promoted to head football coach in 2024 under a five-year contract with a base salary of $615,000 a year, supplemental compensation $135,000 a year, and retention bonuses of $100,000 a year.
He is suing the university for breach of contract and is seeking to get paid the full amount of his contract.
Smith’s lawsuit addresses both the allegations of extramarital affairs and alcohol use on campus. These were cited by university President Lori Stewart Gonzalez in a letter to Smith notifying him of the intent to terminate his contract.
Gonzalez wrote that his conduct triggered the section of his contract allowing for termination if “commission of or participation in any act, situation or occurrence that, in the University’s reasonable judgment, brings Head Coach into public disrepute, contempt, scandal or ridicule, or failure by Head Coach to conform their personal conduct to conventional standards of good citizenship with such conduct offending prevailing social mores and values and/or reflecting unfavorably on University’s reputation.”
Smith acknowledges having a relationship with a student but argues this did not violate university policy because he was not in a position of supervision or control over the student.
The lawsuit argues “there is no University policy prohibiting consensual relationships between employees and students whom the employee does not have a direct supervisory or evaluative control over.”
Smith also argues the relationship was not an extramarital affair. He and his wife were separated and in the process of getting divorced at the time, according to the lawsuit.
“Coach Smith met the woman at an offcampus venue that had no tie to OU and it was nothing more than coincidence that she happened to be an OU student,” according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit says Smith’s ex-wife was aware of the relationship and that both had already moved on and were in other relationships.
Smith says he ended the relationship with the student in early November.
Smith also acknowledges drinking alcohol on campus. The lawsuit says that sometimes after games he and other coaches would gather in his office to toast a win with a shot of bourbon.
The university issued a reprimand to Smith in late November for drinking on campus in violation of university policy on alcohol and drugs.
The lawsuit argues this reprimand was not a proper justification for termination. The reprimand said only future violations could result in further discipline, and Smith did not violate this policy again before his termination a few weeks later, according to the lawsuit.
“Moreover, the presence and consumption of alcohol in University offices and on University property is commonplace at OU,” the lawsuit alleges.
“Considering how frequent OU employees consume alcohol at OU, the reprimand recognized that Coach Smith was unfamiliar that storing and consuming alcohol on University property technically violated University policy,” according to the lawsuit. “In fact, OU serves and encourages alcohol use at University-sponsored events, including in the President’s and Athletic Director’s Suites at OU football games.”
Under Smith’s contract, the university was obligated to pay him the balance of his contract unless he was terminated for cause. The lawsuit alleges that in a rush to remove him, the university “retrofitted a corrective reprimand and a permissible consensual relationship into grounds for termination” so it wouldn’t have to pay.