I remember sitting in a dentist's office in 1987 when I read an article in a
magazine. "Fired and Furious-Valerie Harper vows to fight back." Harper DID
demand more money. But there was also some talk of her being jealous of Jason
Bateman. It seems that he was getting a lot more fan mail than she was.
I wonder if anyone else heard about this.....
Jeffrey McAdam-Reed ( [email protected] )
I heard about her demanding for more money but never about her being jealous of Jason Bateman though. Well the directors and writers won because they took care of her though by writing her off the show. Sandy Duncan did not do too badly though to replace her.
shareIn the 'Triva' section for this show it states she quit over a salary dispute. She didn't quit, she was fired. She wasn't jealous that Jason Bateman was getting more fan mail than she was, rather she felt the show was focusing scripts and plot lines more and more on Jason Bateman, slowly making him into the star of the show. The show was her show, was created for her play the starring role in and was named after her. Along with her salary increase demand, she also put in her contract demands that she wanted the show to stop focusing the majority of the plot & character lines on jason Bateman and return it's focus on to her as the star of the show. She felt she was just a bit player on her own self-titled show. I didn't disagree with her making such demands and although I enjoyed it when Sandy Duncan joined the show, I think it sucked that they fired Valerie Harper from her own show just to 'make an example' out of her.
shareWOW! I did not know anything about this at all! I watched the show when it first came out and when the following season I found it strange that they killed her off in a car accident.
I still watched the show when Sandy Duncan stepped in to take over but I was not too much of a fan of hers to be honest with you. Well the thing is that this also happened with Jason Bateman when he was on Silver Spoons.
I liked it when he was on there and then they wrote him off to star in his own show on the same network of NBC. I believe the show was called The Right Moves or something like that.
I use to see it on USA Network back in the early to mid 90's when they had better programming on than what they do now. I think that when the writers of the show and the creators saw all of the fan mail that Jason Bateman was receiving they just figured to give him more time in front of the camera but Valerie seemed greedy for money you know.
What is the problem with female actresses? I mean Suzanne Somers nearly destroyed Three's Company when she was wanting to make money like a lead male actor makes and she ended up leaving the show.
I think what Valerie pulled might have hurt the ratings of the show as well you know. It is a possibility on that. What do you think? Do you agree with me on that?
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! http://deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
Asking for more money is not being greedy. When a show starts the network usually only orders a certain number of episodes...nowadays it is usually 9 or 13...season 1 of this show got a 10 episode order. As the star you sign on to appear in the series at a certain amount per episode usually with a short-term contract which will be renewed and negotiated should the show be picked up for a full season and beyond. In this case, Valerie Harper's contract was up for renewal once they had completed the short first season and the full second season. It is normal to negotiate your terms when renewing your contract. Since the show had proven a success and got picked up as a series and she was the star, it goes without saying that she would ask for an increase now that she has 'proven' herself in the starring/lead role and made the show a success. Any actor negotiates for more money, among other things any time their contract comes up for renewal. It is just a standard part of the industry...not this particular actress being too 'greedy.'
The Suzanne Somers situation was a whole different situation. It was her agent/husband who put her up to going after more money...the problem in this case was that the show was an ensemble of three people with John Ritter being the star and Suzanne and Jocye DeWitt being his co-stars. Her agent/husband was demanding she be paid more money than John and Joyce and his 'reason' to the studio for this demand was that John ritter may have been brought in as the star but Suzanne was the real star and should be paid as such, that the show would not be as successful as it was if not for her and threatened to walk from the show if they didn't pay her what he was demanding and if that happened the show couldn't possibly go on without her. In this case I agree with the decision to let her go from the show....that is what you call greed!
Thanks for explaining that to me! I appreciate that! I mean I am sure that Valerie could have worked out something with NBC so that she could have remained on the show. Yes she did help and proved that she could play the lead role but it was awful to see her be written off like that though.
Can you help me out since you told me about that website to get this show on DVD? Well I am a fan of USA UP ALL NIGHT that use to be on the USA Network and I am trying to get this show back on again.
Could you please check out the web page that my friend and I created and sign the petition? I would appreciate that guy. You are correct about Suzanne Somers husband who was her manager was greedy. I do remember hearing about that as well. Thanks again guy!
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! http://deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
When any actor's contract comes up for renewal they will either opt out of renewing their contract and leave or they will submit contract demands for negotiation. Every actor does this and the studio says yes or no to all or some of the demands. The actor and the studios 'negotiate' back and forth with counter-demands until mutual terms can be agreed upon.
The huge outrage and media coverage when this happened was over the studio not even negotiating terms with Valerie Harper. She put in her contract demands and they fired her without any discussion or negotiation.
Well then that tells you that they did not really want her on the show then guy. I mean especially they found Sandy Duncan to immediately step in to help her big brother you know.
That is what I am starting to see now is that NBC did not want Valerie Harper to come back onto the show and they wanted to take it into a different direction. In which they did but it did not help out because the show did not stay on too long maybe 4 to 5 years at the most you know.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! http://deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
It wasn't that they didn't want her on the show. When she was negotiating her contract terms, including a salary increase, she didn't show up for work because her contract wasn't resolved. This is the common action of actors when their contract renewals are in negotiations, not to report to the set. They decided to use her as an example, showing that even if you are the star of your own show you can still be fired, in order to deter other stars from doing the same. Of course this would only be effective if the show survived and since it did, it worked out in their favor in the end. She did sue Lorimar, the studio who produced the show, and won a case against them for continuing to use her name for the show after they fired her. Harper argued that the title implied her continued involvement. She won $1.4 million in damages and 12% of the show's profits.
Sandy Duncan was not 'immediately' hired to step in as a replacement when they fired Valerie Harper. Sandy Duncan was hired just shortly before the third season started to air.
Oh ok I just learned even more information from you! Thanks guy! I guess at the time I did not really pay attention to all of that drama like I do now you know. When this show first came out I was only 14 years old at the time.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! http://deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
A few corrections. Valerie Harper's contract was not "up for renewal" after the first short season. She was signed to a five-year deal. Yes, it is not uncommon for an actor to renegotiate while they are still under contract, but she was still in breach of contract for not showing up. She was also unhappy with the direction of the show; she was a veteran of "Mary Tyler Moore" and "Rhoda" and wanted more sophisticated scripts, while producers Miller/Boyett were used to aiming their shows more at kids.
Valerie did return to the set for the third season for a single episode - the one where the house catches on fire. The producers claimed she was being difficult on the set, so they fired her. NBC already had Sandy Duncan under a holding deal (she had recently done an unsold pilot for them called "Act II") and they had quietly talked to her slightly before Valerie Harper was fired, just to see if there was any interest there. So Harper was fired, and Duncan quickly brought in. The fire episode was refilmed with Duncan.
The reason Valerie won her lawsuit was because she returned to the set and then was fired. Had they fired her while she was holding out and in breach of contract, they would have been justified. But she returned, and NBC and Lorimar apparently regretted it - that was their mistake.
Too bad all parties couldn't have settled things amicably - the show was much better with Valerie there. The scripts were certainly better; that episode with Valerie directing Mrs. Poole in community theater would never have been done with Sandy Duncan. And everything seemed so contrived after Sandy came on board.
Reruns of "Valerie" started cracking the top 10 during the summer of 1987, and it seemed like the show was headed to be a consistent top 10 performer. But once Sandy came on board, ratings settled into the low teens; not bad, but certainly not the success it could have been. The show never did that well in syndication, either, and I think that would have been different had Valerie stayed.
I totally agree with you that the show was better when Valerie Harper was on the show. I always figured that Valerie left the show to do another show because around the same time that she was fired from Valerie she wound up doing some show on CBS I believe but did not last very long.
I cannot remember the name of the show because this was like 21 or 22 years ago when this happened. I was not a big fan of Sandy Duncan stepping in and thought the show would have been better with Valerie Harper on the show. It is a shame that it went down in ratings because I loved to watch this when it was on and I also remember when Mark and Willie were wearing Swatches because back in the 80's if you had a Swatch it was the most popular and preppy thing to have on.
I stuck with the show but when it went into syndication and changed from NBC to CBS I stopped watching the show because the time slot that CBS had the show on I was watching something else that I liked instead.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
I know it has been three years since this post but...
A few corrections. Valerie Harper's contract was not "up for renewal" after the first short season. She was signed to a five-year deal. Yes, it is not uncommon for an actor to renegotiate while they are still under contract, but she was still in breach of contract for not showing up.
She was also unhappy with the direction of the show; she was a veteran of "Mary Tyler Moore" and "Rhoda" and wanted more sophisticated scripts, while producers Miller/Boyett were used to aiming their shows more at kids.
Valerie did return to the set for the third season for a single episode - the one where the house catches on fire... The fire episode was refilmed with Duncan.
[deleted]
[deleted]
If I was the judge in the case I would given Ms. Harper 50% of the profits and I would have had Mr. Miller, Mr. Boyett, and all Lorimar executives involved Ms. Harper's termination pay her 50% of their salaries each for five years.
shareIt's Your Move was the name of Jason Bateman's show. I loved it as a kid but they canned it after like one season.
shareYeah that is correct that the name of the show was It's Your Move with Jason Bateman! I have read through that thread and from what people tell me is that when the presidential election was going on the show was post poned due to the debates or President Reagon giving a speech.
That is what I read and it is a shame that they canceled the show. I remember watching this on USA Nework back in the late 80's or in the 90's and I was so excited to see it. That is why I prefer USA Network to go back to their old programming rather than what they have on now which is very awful programming!
Now all USA Network wants to show is crime and drama shows in marathons instead of trying to show some shows like It's Your Move, Double Trouble, My Two Dads, and Just The Ten Of Us. The programming it seems like is more for adults rather than for kids or families to enjoy if you notice.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
" I believe the show was called The Right Moves or something like that."
The show was called It's Your Move. Totally forgot about it until you mentioned it. WOW. Just watched the pilot on youtube. I was 8 when this was on. Now I finally know where I know Karen Caye from. Thanks
Thanks for correcting me on the title of the show. You can also see Karen Caye in My Tutor and she has a great set of racks in that movie! You would love it too because she is so hot!
It's Your Move also starred the guy who was on Married with Children playing Steve Darcy I believe his characters name was.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
-It's Your Move also starred the guy who was on Married with Children playing Steve Darcy I believe his characters name was.
His real name is David Garrison and on the show his name was Steve Rhoades.
That is right David Garrison is his real name and he did play Steve Rhoades! Thanks for that information guy! I appreciate that a lot!
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
Jason Bateman made Valerie's Family a top ten show in my opinion. Valerie Harper was great on the show as well. It was a funny show because of the two of them.
When she left I kinda quit watching. I was always miffed that they fired her. Jason's character took over the show after that. I really really liked his character, too.
She should have had patience and waited to see what happened. The show would have run 5 or 10 years like Raymond or King of Queens. So what if one of the kids breaks out and makes the show better?
Probably the focus would have been more on Bateman but look what happened to Family Ties.
That show was supposed to focus on the parents and started to focus on Alex because he was funny and very popular with the fans. Everyone else was a bit player but it was not intended to be that way at first.
A rising tide lifts all boats, something Val didn't get!
Valerie just got her jaw out of joint and wasn't a team player. She is funny but so are other people.
Good grief. Actors are so stupid. Jason Bateman has gone on to big and better things in film...and what in heck is SHE doing?
You are correct about Jason Bateman making the show Valerie a top ten show back in the day when it first came out. Yes Valerie Harper was great on the show whens he was on there. Yes it was a funny show to watch because of both of them and the other actors I feel that was a part of the show.
I was not too happy that she left the show because at that time I did not look into or investigate why she left the show like I do now when I am watching a show. That was not cool at all that they fired her. Yes I have to agree with you there that Jasons character did take over the show after that. He always was the trouble maker ever since he started in acting at a very young age because I remember him playing in Silver Spoons as Ricky's best friend who always caused trouble you know.
Well it was focused on Bateman but still all of the other actors had key roles on the show while it was on. Yes I remember what happened on Family Ties. I grew up watching that show when it was on. Well Alex was a very interesting character though and that was why it became so popular.
No I do not think that Valerie Harper understood that she was not going to be the reason why people tuned in every week to watch the show. It was going to be based upon like you said Jason Bateman or one of the other boys or another actor on the show.
Not she was not a team player at all while on the show. Yes I agree that she was funny and so are other people as well. Jason Bateman rolled with the times and took roles in TV shows or movies that helped his career out where as Valerie Harper has not and I have not seen her do that much work to be honest with you.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans of the show! www.deefilmroll.com/usa-uan/
What is the problem with female actresses?
I was not saying that there was anything wrong with female actresses guy and you do not need to call me a moron. See if you look at it the young teenage audience which mainly might have been girls tuned in possibly to watch Jason Bateman or the other two male actors. I am sure there were men that liked Valerie Harper.
I was merely trying to figure out why Valerie Harper was fired from the show. It was due to her wanting to make more money. We cannot even watch the show because not that many networks want to show it in reruns. Plus, she is holding out for the show to go on DVD box set for us to see and watch the show. The only way that we will be able to see Valerie/Valerie's Family/The Hogans/The Hogan Family is when she passes away and then one of Valerie Harpers family members gives the permission to SHOUT or Anchor Bay to release the show in DVD box sets for us fans to watch.
Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans! http://usaupallnight.webs.com
[quote]I was not saying that there was anything wrong with female actresses guy
I liked the show much better as the Hogan Family with Sandy.. They expanded the other characters very well
share At the once huge star of MTM and Rhoda trying to get the once supporting character on Silver Spoons to fade in the backround and then getting fired. Shows how relevant she became :p.
You just can't write stuff like that.
Although I agree with your assessment that the shows almost ended because of the female's demand for more money, I don't think that's really the problem. The problem is that execs often undervalue the women on shows and make it tougher for them to compete than it is for the males to demand and get more money. If all the stars in the show start the show with basically the same credentials under their belt, why shouldn't they all be paid equally from the start? To save a few dollars (or thousands of dollars) execs often kowtow to the male's demands if he's popular enough, but tell the female 'sorry sweetheart, tough luck, so deal with it'. This was even more true in the late 70's and most or all of the 80's when equality in the workplace was even more unbalanced than it is now and in Hollywood the imbalance is even more profound because of the amount of power the studios hold.
Besides, it's not just the females. John Schneider and Tom Wopat walked off of the "Dukes of Hazzard" because the execs didn't want to give them a fair wage increase of a percentage of the profits from the marketing of toys and other memorabilia. Replacing them with Byron Cherry and Chris Mayer about killed the show and the execs were forced to bring the original duo back or risk the show getting cancelled. However, if it had been Catherine Bach who'd protested and that they'd replaced, the execs probably would have never backed down even though Bach had a huge following amongst the male population.
I don't mean any disrespect, but I did feel that I should comment on what I knew of the situation...basically from what I read at the time it was happening. Im not saying that Harper was right to do what she did. I personally don't think the show was popular enough to warrant too much of a wage increase if any, nor do I think she should have made too much more...if anything...than her costars. She might have been big in the 70's, but her fame had dwindled a good bit by the time this show came about. I don't think the problem is so much a female thing though, but a exec vs. star ego thing. I'm sure there are many more examples of this sort of thing happening, but they aren't coming to mind just now.
Again, no disrespect intended...just felt I should throw in my two cents. Thanks for the info you've provided as well. Some of that I hadn't known or remembered. Peace, friend.
You do make some valid points about the situation with Valerie Harper. I can see if Valerie had hit #1 for the first season and everyone was tuning in to watch the show I can understand her asking for a pay increase. The show was decent and I loved watching it. Then when NBC sold it to CBS in the late 80's I knew it had switched networks. The time slot that they had put it on ran against a TV show I loved to watch. So I did not watch the show the last season or two that it was on.
I very much remember about John Schneider and Tom Wopat walking off the set of Dukes Of Hazzard due to Warner Brothers making money off of the merchandise of the show. I would not have had a problem if they had included the fake Duke boys prior to the disagreement that John and Tom had with WB. I thought it was a bit strange that in both the reunion movies that they had in the late 90's and early 2000's they never had the fake Duke boys join in. They were a part of the show for a year or two. CBS always buys away shows I notice from NBC or ABC. The problem with it is that by the time they get their hands onto the show they make it worse and it does not last long. They eventually cancel the show.
I would love to see this show come out on DVD but who knows when it will be shown again in reruns? I remember about 7 or 8 years ago ABC Family was showing it in reruns. Then the old PAX station that is known now as ION use to show the show in reruns in the late 90's and then early 2000's along with Dave I believe it was. I have not seen it since. We will not see Valerie released on DVD until her and WB come to some sort of arrangement on money.
Although I agree with your assessment that the shows almost ended because of the female's demand for more money, I don't think that's really the problem. The problem is that execs often undervalue the women on shows and make it tougher for them to compete than it is for the males to demand and get more money. If all the stars in the show start the show with basically the same credentials under their belt, why shouldn't they all be paid equally from the start? To save a few dollars (or thousands of dollars) execs often kowtow to the male's demands if he's popular enough, but tell the female 'sorry sweetheart, tough luck, so deal with it'. This was even more true in the late 70's and most or all of the 80's when equality in the workplace was even more unbalanced than it is now and in Hollywood the imbalance is even more profound because of the amount of power the studios hold.
Besides, it's not just the females. John Schneider and Tom Wopat walked off of the "Dukes of Hazzard" because the execs didn't want to give them a fair wage increase or a percentage of the profits from the marketing of toys and other memorabilia. Replacing them with Byron Cherry and Chris Mayer about killed the show and the execs were forced to bring the original duo back or risk the show getting cancelled. However, if it had been Catherine Bach who'd protested and that they'd replaced, the execs probably would have never backed down even though Bach had a huge following amongst the male population.
I don't mean any disrespect, but I did feel that I should comment on what I knew of the situation...basically from what I read at the time it was happening. I'm not saying that Harper was right to do what she did. I personally don't think the show was popular enough to warrant too much of a wage increase if any, nor do I think she should have made too much more...if anything...than her costars. She might have been big in the 70's, but her fame had dwindled a good bit by the time this show came about. I don't think the problem is so much a female thing though, but a exec vs. star ego thing. I'm sure there are many more examples of this sort of thing happening, but they aren't coming to mind just now.
Again, no disrespect intended...I just felt that I should throw in my two cents. Thanks for the info you've provided as well. Some of that I hadn't known or remembered. Peace, friend.
She did kind of quit though. She refused to come back to work until her demands were met. They eventually came to an agreement and she came back to work and shot the first episode of season 3. She then decided she wasn't happy with the new deal and refused to come back so the show started filming the new episodes without her and eventually they decided to just kill off her character and bring in Sandy Duncan. Plenty of blame to go around but it is mostly her fault that she was no longer a part of the show.
share[deleted]
She WAS fired for asking for too much nmoney, the same thing happened with the first and better Jimmy from Lois and Clark.
She did NOT quit as the trivia says -- whoever said that was probably with the team of hte show and you can't say that -- slander.
If she was jealous of JB because he was getting more fanmail maybe she should have stopped acting like a 12 year old girl. The show wasn't about her it was about her character and her family.
You're laborers, you're supposed to be laboring! That's what you get for not having an education!!
A similar situation happened on Family Ties. It was said that Meredith Baxter Birney was unhappy that the show was focusing more and more on Michael J. Fox, who became an enormous star because of the show. However I doubt she ever thought of quitting, pretty stupid to quit a hit show, huh Valerie Harper???? She should have just been happy that the show was working.
shareDidn't the same thing happen to David Caruso for "NYPD Blue"?
shareThe same kind of thing happened on FAMILY TIES with Michael W. Fox, and on LOST IN SPACE, when Dr. Smith, Will, and the Robot basically took over the show. Guy Williams was furious about it, but at least he stayed around.
shareValerie did the first two seasons of the show. She asked for raze true ,plus for the to have her and her husband as producers which was in her contract from the begining accoroding to her. when they were refused her and her husband packed up their offices and left the set. she didnt do the first two episodes of season three true. but he powers that be came and valerie came to agrement at least on her salary and she retuirned to film one episode and then they let her go. She read it in the news they were going to kill off he character and hurt her feelings. she also said in an interview thsat she called and let the boys nknow she wouldnt be back and they were saddened by it. they only thing she ever asked for the boys was that they were brought into the story lines a bit more. which i think was quiet generous of her. she did sue and she wont the pay she wouldnt have gotten for the season they fired her from . plus i belive mental anguishn something like that. casue the producer kept going to tabloids and saying wild things about her . she nuts and crazy and preminstrel. the asme excuses they used for firing her. you ask me these powers that be needed to grow up. they sould have known how to deal with contractchanges better than they did. they had history of being in buinsess at hat point and called themselves perfessionals. and valerie weas right she should have had her contract wirth everything in it she wanted from the begining. oh i almost forgot as part of the settlement they had to cease and dissit from using her name on the series. the court let the third season finish off with the title valeries family. and after that it it went to the hogan family. anyway if you find the hogan fan page there is whole web page with legal documents and valeries interviews (and no ther not from tabloids) that tell the whole thing. thats were i got the info from.
share[deleted]
Pre-minstrel ! So she didn't have blackface and a banjo?
shareShe wanted a bigger salary than Cosby, which was a major factor in things.
shareValerie Harper was wrongfully fired from the show. Basically, Valerie had asked for a raise and told the show she wouldn't show up for work until there was some sort of agreement reached. The show filmed the first episode of Season 3 without her. A week later, an agreement was reached where Valerie was given a 15% raise and more profit shares in the show (hard to believe she had to fight to get this since she created the show with her husband and it was named originally after her). She showed up for work, they re-shot the episode to include her in it, and things were back to normal. New contracts were drawn up and she was back to work, ready for a full season. The episode that they shot was inevitably the episode "Liars and Other Strangers" for "Valerie's Family". Look at that episode and you'll see Jeremy Licht's hair go from short to long to medium length etc. It's because this was the episode that was initially shot without Valerie at all, and then re-shot (with some scenes kept) with her in it, and then re-shot again to include Sandy, although Sandy doesn't figure much into it.
Anyway, in the interim, someone had mentioned Sandy Duncan who had a deal with NBC for a new pilot and series to follow. When Brandon Tartikoff learned of what was going on at "Valerie", he figured he could write off his contractual obligation to Sandy Duncan by placing her as the female lead. The problem was, things were worked out between Harper and Lorimar/NBC so to save face both publicly and legally, they back pedaled and claimed "buyer's remorse", telling Harper, while she was in a costume fitting for Season 3 of "Valerie", that she was not coming back. That's when she held a press conference and announced publicly that she was fired. Hence the rumors of her greed and being unstable went into overdrive. Lorimar and NBC stated that she wasn't worth the pay increase when the show had the ever-growing popular teenage heart throb Jason Bateman. They claimed that she was disruptive and combative and greedy, and then proceeded to downplay her involvement in the show by not mentioning her at all or mentioning her death as a setup for a joke (tasteless as that may seem, it's what was done). I'm thrilled she won in the end.
A side note. Valerie didn't just star in the show. She and her husband were co-producers and helped to create the show before it even aired, so when the show started to pick up steam ratings-wise, it's not unreasonable to expect a monetary increase as well. Also, she wanted more input into the writing since she felt the show was regressing into the typical Miller-Boyett formula (a la "Full House"/"Family Matters" etc.) type of story and felt the show could be so much more. It wasn't a case of a star getting a swelled head. In fact, I'd even say so much that the main reason the show was able to carry on without her had to do with her input in developing it. She came from an ensemble history ("The Mary Tyler Moore Show" and "Rhoda") and knew how things were done in that regard. So the fact that it succeeded without her is testament to her as well. Not only her, mind you, but she clearly wasn't unimportant as some have suggested. In fact, I think had the show started out with Sandy as the lead and had the same type of dumbed down stories that it had once they canned Valerie, no way would it have survived as long as it had.
Ed
Actually Valerie Harper demanded that the show focus more on her character than the Jason Bateman's character; however Jason Bateman's character was more popular and they had people watching the show because of his character. CBS refused and fired her as a result. I remember it at the time because his character was just about as popular as Michael J. Fox's character was on Family Ties. Because Jason Bateman pulled in close to as many viewers as Michael J. Fox did CBS wasn't willing to give in to her demands.
shareAccording to her autobiography she stated she was wrongfully fired from the show by Lorimar and fought them in court. There's a clause in contracts now related to this to avoid issues like this in the future.
share