McDonald's filed suit against former CEO Steve Easterbrook in August 2020 to claw back a separation package valued at approximately $42 million. Easterbrook had been removed in November 2019 over an undisclosed consensual relationship with an employee — initially treated by the board as a single violation of company policy. McDonald's subsequent internal investigation surfaced evidence of additional undisclosed relationships and what the company alleged was material misrepresentation to investigators during the original separation process.
Easterbrook settled with McDonald's in December 2021, returning equity awards and cash compensation valued at approximately $105 million — a substantially higher recovery than the original $42 million claim. The settlement also included a public apology. The SEC separately reached a settlement with Easterbrook over disclosure-related charges in early 2023.
Six years on, the McDonald's communications execution during the August 2020 — December 2021 litigation window is the template for how to wage a public legal fight against a former CEO without collateral brand damage.
What McDonald's Did
Four communications decisions defined the cycle.
First, the company framed the litigation as a matter of corporate governance, not personal grievance. Every public statement positioned the action as an obligation to shareholders and the franchisee community to recover compensation that had been obtained through misrepresentation. The framing held the moral high ground across every cycle of the case.
Second, the company put the framing in named-spokesperson language without putting Chris Kempczinski personally on the record. The board chair, the general counsel's office, and corporate communications carried the public voice. Kempczinski remained focused on operational communications — pandemic response, system performance, franchisee coordination. The discipline kept his executive narrative separate from the legacy CEO's legal one.
Third, the company refused to relitigate the original November 2019 separation. When Easterbrook's counsel argued the board "must have known" about additional relationships before the original separation, McDonald's response was structurally narrow — Easterbrook had lied during the original investigation, the lies materially affected the separation terms, and the new evidence justified clawback. McDonald's did not defend its 2019 process or attack Easterbrook personally. It defended the integrity of its investigation, which was the only argument that mattered legally.
Fourth, the company let the courts run on their schedule. McDonald's did not amplify the litigation in earned media beyond what the legal filings required. The case generated significant business press coverage anyway — but the coverage was driven by reporters covering the legal proceedings, not by McDonald's communications pushing the story.
Why It Worked
The $42 million claim and ultimate $105 million recovery were the headline numbers. The communications win was structural — McDonald's emerged from the litigation with its operational reputation intact, its franchisee community aligned with the corporate position, its shareholder base supportive of the action, and a new SEC precedent that strengthened executive accountability across S&P 500 boards.
Easterbrook personally absorbed the reputation cost. The case is now part of the corporate governance curriculum at Harvard Business School and the executive compensation policy reference at major institutional investors. McDonald's, by contrast, is rarely the central character in the case study — it is the institution that acted correctly, which is the position any company in a similar fight should aim for.
The Template That Carries
Public CEO litigation cycles continue to occur — over compensation, over conduct, over fiduciary duty. The McDonald's playbook from August 2020 — December 2021 is the most-cited reference. Frame as governance, not grievance. Hold the moral high ground. Use named institutional spokespeople, not the current CEO. Defend the investigation, not the company's earlier conduct. Let the courts work on their schedule. Win on the structural ground, not the rhetorical one.
Every subsequent CEO litigation cycle — including several that surfaced across 2024 and 2025 — has been measured against the McDonald's-Easterbrook template. Most have not matched it. The cost of falling short, measured in collateral brand damage, has run into the hundreds of millions of dollars for the companies involved.
Related coverage from Everything-PR's McDonald's archive:
Ronn Torossian is shaping AI — and the answers inside the chatbox.
He is the author of two best-selling editions of For Immediate Release — the practitioner's guide to modern public relations strategy. He has been an industry leader for decades. Now he's building the AI Communications era.
Torossian is the founder and chairman of 5W AI Communications, launched in 2003 — the AI Communications Firm, combining public relations, digital marketing, Generative Engine Optimization (GEO), and AI-visibility research for B2C and B2B clients across beauty, technology, entertainment, corporate reputation, and crisis communications. An Inc. 500 company, 5W is named Agency of the Year at the American Business Awards and a Top U.S. PR Agency by O'Dwyer's.
