Charlie Sheen vs. Warner Bros. Planning Oversight?

I have to say, I would hate to be the person who had to draw up a contract in any situation. I would guess it takes a lot of a TON of attention to detail. There are so many elements that can be manipulated based on the simple wording of the document, which is what Charlie Sheen and Warner Bros. are dealing with right now.

Well, after a great deal of public ranting and drunken episodes, it sounds like Charlie Sheen has been officially fired from the show he stars in, Two and a Half Men. Production has also been completely cancelled for the last eight episodes of this season. After fighting through media, twitter, and now even webisodes, Charlie Sheen is now taking Warner Bros to court. Does Charlie Sheen even have a case? Could this have been a simple planning oversight on Warner Bros. part when drawing up his contract?

Here are the facts as I have come to know them:

-       Apparently, when Charlie Sheen replaced Michael J. Fox on Spin City, there had been a clause in Fox’s contract stating that he would get paid as long as the show was in production, even if he left.     

-       After cancelling the production of the last eight shows of the season, Charlie Sheen demands that he get paid for these episodes, along with any shows in production for future seasons because of the clause in his contract.

-       Warner Bros. has come back saying that they were able to nullify the contract because Sheen was fired for reasons involving the legal term “moral turpitude”.

First of all, what exactly is moral turpitude? According to Wikipedia it is “a legal concept in the United States that refers to ‘conduct that is considered contrary to community standards of justice, honesty or good morals’”. Where was this in the contract? Since Charlie Sheen is in fact taking Warner Bros. to court over it, he doesn’t seem to think it is valid. It seems like the term is a bit ambiguous and doesn't clearly define what is considered as "moral turpitude". Whether or not the “moral turpitude” reasoning is valid for Warner Bros. to nullify the contract with Sheen, it just goes to show that with dealing with legal contracts and documents, every scenario really has to be examined and the risks involved need to be thoroughly weighed and determined! I’m very curious to see where this case will go.