Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GoState99755

K'tuck/MAGA Kid has a team of 7-attnys putting together a Libel & Defamation suit

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, modestobulldog said:

Yes, Yes, and Yes

No, the measuring stick is what the market (yes, I have heard attorneys use this term regarding settlements) will bear.  I repeat, the billable attorneys on both sides struck gold.  The plaintiff's greatest danger is what sometimes befalls common folk receiving a windfall.

I know some people this message boards are "serious".  Personally, I view them primarily as entertainment (once again, please refer to my moniker).  The flame wars between you and B-25 are very entertaining.  Both of you are to be commended.  Chill out man.  As for mental capacities, I will refer you to Dirty Harry.

If California is an example, you are spot on. As an example, L.A.'s legal paper, the Daily Journal, regularly publishes tort claim verdict amounts for guidance.

However, it is about as equally reported that trial judges or appellate judges reduce jury awards as being excessive based on the actual damages found.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, modestobulldog said:

Wouldn't any attorney worth their salt advise settlement?

Of course they would. They'd want this to go away as quickly and quietly as possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, GoState99755 said:

 

Hang on their buddy...you haven't finished yet.

 

Even if I dropped dead this evening, I still have finished more than 2 years. So you should be washing my feet based on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

If California is an example, you are spot on. As an example, L.A.'s legal paper, the Daily Journal, regularly publishes tort claim verdict amounts for guidance.

However, it is about as equally reported that trial judges or appellate judges reduce jury awards as being excessive based on the actual damages found.

There is not a snowballs chance this ends in trial, neither side could stomach the risk.

110926run_defense710.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, modestobulldog said:

There is not a snowballs chance this ends in trial, neither side could stomach the risk.

Considering how horrific the one thread about the event was here - and I'll take my share of blame - I sincerely hope you are correct.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Joe from WY said:

Is "I went to Law School for 2 years and dropped out" the new board equivalent of "I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night"?

lmao. 

More money owning your own company than in law for me.   I love hearing you guys opine on how much you think this kid is getting.   

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, edluvar said:

More money owning your own company than in law for me.   I love hearing you guys opine on how much you think this kid is getting.   

I've never said he was going to get a huge sum of money. Just that most of the named defendants are going to attempt to settle this as quickly as possible. 

My only other contribution to the thread is mocking the "expert" commentary. Carry on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, modestobulldog said:

Yes, Yes, and Yes

No, the measuring stick is what the market (yes, I have heard attorneys use this term regarding settlements) will bear.  I repeat, the billable attorneys on both sides struck gold.  The plaintiff's greatest danger is what sometimes befalls common folk receiving a windfall.

I know some people this message boards are "serious".  Personally, I view them primarily as entertainment (once again, please refer to my moniker).  The flame wars between you and B-25 are very entertaining.  Both of you are to be commended.  Chill out man.  As for mental capacities, I will refer you to Dirty Harry.      

I dunno.  Publications like The National Enquirer make all kinds of outlandish claims about people, and a simple retraction, even if it's self-contradictory, is all they need to avoid losing a suit.

And those are people who could show actual damages.  In this case it's just some unknown kid and whatever statements were made.  News usually reports the news, so it's unlikely they would be liable for slander or libel.  They are reporting what others are claiming.  So then what?  Opinion pieces?  I just don't see that holding up.  Even if they could prove slander or libel, what damages did the kid have?  Does he have proof a university scholarship was rescinded because of the press pieces?  He lose a job offer?  No, he's in high school.  People laughing and pointing or even yelling at him isn't enough to prove damages.  

If he could show therapy bills and have a history to outline how any libelous or slanderous statements caused him suffering that required mental health treatment...maybe?  But it hasn't been that long and he went on news shows himself, IIRC.  So what damages?

Sure his lawyers can sue whoever they want. Doesn't mean it will go anywhere.

And that doesn't even begin to discuss the paper hell so many lawyers could throw at each other to drive up billable hours.  Vast majority of lawyers are the absolute worst type of people on the planet.  I wish I could bill people in the bullshit ways they invent.  With the number of litigants, could you imagine the deluge of billable hours so many defendant lawyers could furnish on the kids lawyers?  They'd be wallowing in a sea for years.

 I really don't think this is a goldmine at all.  

Guess we'll see. 

 

 

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Boise fan said:

I dunno.  Publications like The National Enquirer make all kinds of outlandish claims about people, and a simple retraction, even if it's self-contradictory, is all they need to avoid losing a suit.

And those are people who could show actual damages.  In this case it's just some unknown kid and whatever statements were made.  News usually reports the news, so it's unlikely they would be liable for slander or libel.  They are reporting what others are claiming.  So then what?  Opinion pieces?  I just don't see that holding up.  Even if they could prove slander or libel, what damages did the kid have?  Does he have proof a university scholarship was rescinded because of the press pieces?  He lose a job offer?  No, he's in high school.  People laughing and pointing or even yelling at him isn't enough to prove damages.  

If he could show therapy bills and have a history to outline how any libelous or slanderous statements caused him suffering that required mental health treatment...maybe?  But it hasn't been that long and he went on news shows himself, IIRC.  So what damages?

Sure his lawyers can sue whoever they want. Doesn't mean it will go anywhere.

And that doesn't even begin to discuss the paper hell so many lawyers could throw at each other to drive up billable hours.  Vast majority of lawyers are the absolute worst type of people on the planet.  I wish I could bill people in the bullshit ways they invent.  With the number of litigants, could you imagine the deluge of billable hours so many defendant lawyers could furnish on the kids lawyers?  They'd be wallowing in a sea for years.

 I really don't think this is a goldmine at all.  

Guess we'll see. 

 

 

Yeah there are no damages.   Retractions were printed which is the custom in matters like this.  Rarely seen on Fox News.  

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, edluvar said:

Kids are already cashing in on their fame with go fund me campaigns 😂

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/heavy.com/news/2019/01/stand-with-covington-gofundme/amp/

I saw this kid the other day.  I can't recall if it was on one of the media shows or You Tube, etc.  The kid isn't even from Covington.  He's a student political activist from Geogia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJ_Pearson

Half of the godundme is going to some youth pro life organization, the other half to the Covington kids defense efforts.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pokebball said:

I saw this kid the other day.  I can't recall if it was on one of the media shows or You Tube, etc.  The kid isn't even from Covington.  He's a student political activist from Geogia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CJ_Pearson

Half of the godundme is going to some youth pro life organization, the other half to the Covington kids defense efforts.

I guess I don’t get what they are defending.   They are rock stars for conservatives making more money and doing more interviews than they ever did before standing up to that mean Native American.   

Posted Image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, edluvar said:

I guess I don’t get what they are defending.   They are rock stars for conservatives making more money and doing more interviews than they ever did before standing up to that mean Native American.   

Legal fund might be the better descriptor.  Even rock stars have legal expenses.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Maybe.

If a depo gets rough, his attorneys can simply order him not to answer. However, in a trial all they can do to protect him is raise objections based on a question being argumentative, irrelevant or whatever and if the objections are overruled, he's going to have to answer. And I think you may be overlooking how much money the defendants will have to hire PIs to investigate the kid. No way will they leave a stone unturned like the Virginia governor's Republican opponent did in not discovering that blackface photo. Maybe they won't "attack" him but the plaintiff puts its case on first and if that case is down and dirty, they aren't going to hesitate to put dirt in the record during their own case in chief.

I bet they won't even cross examine him in a trial.  They will want the kid off the stand as fast as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, edluvar said:

Yeah there are no damages.   Retractions were printed which is the custom in matters like this.  Rarely seen on Fox News.  

No damages?

They didn't damage this kids reputation with their negligent reporting is that what you are saying?  HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bluerules009 said:

No damages?

They didn't damage this kids reputation with their negligent reporting is that what you are saying?  HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

They'll start throwing around something nebulous like "emotional damages", and the settlements will just roll in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Joe from WY said:

They'll start throwing around something nebulous like "emotional damages", and the settlements will just roll in.

All they have to say is the kid is scared to go outside because of all the death threats of which I am sure the lefty's handed out in spades.   He can't pursue his dream of public service because of his damaged reputation.  

Damages on a high school student are easy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

I bet they won't even cross examine him in a trial.  They will want the kid off the stand as fast as possible.

If the matter goes to trial and if the PIs working for the defendants dig up anything on the kid which would suggest he's a racist or someone in his family is, you can bet your mortgage there will be a cross examination. Of course, if they do dig up such stuff all lawsuits would presumably be dropped in exchange for nothing more than an apology.

And BTW, I wouldn't assume no such information exists merely because of the filing of a lawsuit. After all, the guy who is now governor of Virginia was apparently dumb enough to think that nobody would ever find that blackface law school photo.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...