No he didn't. Trek and Lemond settled the case. People settle cases every day for all kinds of reasons. Liability may have been uncertain but Trek looked at the potential risks of going to trial vs. the certain costs of continuing the litigation. Trek was a defendant and had no upside-- even if they took the case to trial, the best they'd ever do is a verdict of no liability, but they had no possible recovery. So they probably looked at it as a pure business proposition, i.e., how much would they spend continuing with the litigation, vs. how little did they have to pay to essentially buy an insurance policy that they would never be litigating Lemond's claims and would put an end to the suit. This is an analysis that litigants in civil suits undertake all the time, and it's also why, even though liability is disputed, defendants in civil suits opt to settle out more often than they elect to go to trial. The costs of modern civil litigation are just overwhelming, and the cost to a company not only in legal fees, but also in the numbers of people who are kept away from their real tasks at work having to attend depositions, look for documents, answer voluminous interrogatories, attend pre-trial hearings and motions, attend trial, etc., can be daunting and in some cases cripple a company. Trek is big in terms of bicycle manufacturers, but I'm willing to bet that their management structure isn't like looking at GM or any Fortune 100 company, and they were looking at years of continued expense and time consumption with zero upside for the company. The figure that I've heard is that they agreed to pay $300K to a charity of Lemond's choosing (at least that's what I recall). While that may be a moral victory for Lemond, it's not a "win" and it also isn't a loss for Trek (actually it was a pretty smart PR move, so the donation is deductible, makes them look like good citizens, etc.).
I don't think anyone "won". Most civil business disputes don't go to trial, and most don't result in "wins" or "losses"...just a lot of money spent on legal fees with entirely uncertain outcomes. Settling is just a way to regain at least a small amount of certainty to end the process. Just MHO.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram