Case 3: World Wrestling Federation
McMahon had a choice but to let him go. Bret was worth much more than they could afford at that time.
5. Was Vince McMahon justified in insisting that Bret Hart lose his final match in Montreal to Shawn Michaels? Was Bret Hart justified in his reasons for refusing to go along with the script as directed by McMahon?
-After Bret Hart had been with McMahon all that time, you would think he would have had a little more consideration. But McMahon was doing what was best for the business. So no, he was not justified in asking Bret Hart to lose to Shawn Micheals, especially since he knew of the hard feelings between them. Based on those same reasons, Bret Hart was justified in refusing to go along with the script. McMahon had already asked Bret to make the US fans dislike him, which he went along with. To ask him to lose to such a baby(Michaels) on his way out after all those years was not justified at all in my opinion.
6. How should the impasse between McMahon and Hart be resolved?
-At that point it would be very difficult to work a resolution into the scripts because the American fans dislike Bret. But through TV interviews and other media they could settle the conflict. Bret Hart would have to be willing to let go of the betrayals McMahon has caused. Overall Bret ended up with a better deal financially, but also lost out on a lot of fan support once he had to become the bad guy.