Posted on 09/29/2009 11:24:00 AM PDT by abb
More than two years after Dan Rather filed a $70-million lawsuit against CBS for breach of contract and fraud, a New York Supreme Court appellate division has tossed out his claim.
The ruling, handed down today, dismissed Rather's claims that CBS News broke his contract and committed fraud by sidelining him in the wake of a controversial story he reported about President George W. Bush's Vietnam-era service in the Texas Air Guard. The anchor alleged that CBS sought to curtail reporting on the story because of pressure from its then-parent company, Viacom.
But in its ruling, the appeals panel found that CBS did not violate the terms of Rather's contract because it continued to pay him, citing the contract's "pay or play" provision. The finding was a major blow to the longtime newsman, who had cast the suit as part of a broader effort to rein in the influence of corporations on news organizations.
[Updated at 11:11 a.m.: CBS was jubilant about the ruling. “We’re studying the decision right now, but it appears to be a total victory – and vindication for CBS’ position,” said CBS News spokesman Jeff Ballabon. Neither Rather nor his attorneys immediately returned a call for comment.
In its ruling, issued more than five months after the parties argued the case before the appellate division, the court reversed Judge Ira Gammerman’s decisions on the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
ping
Too bad Dan. You should be ecstatic now that your guy is President. Maybe someday you will understand that lying in the long run always catches up with you.
The Pajama Crew!!
Awesome.
Dang, I was looking forward to it.
Hope ya didn’t spend too much money on that, Dan.
I thought a week ago, or so, they declined to dismiss it.
You would think the guy would be happy that he was paid after he was fired, and not thrown in jail for abetting the forging of documents to influence a Federal election, no doubt a major felony.
I hear the court faxed the opinion in from Kinko’s.
Now can we get back to investigating Dan for conspiracy to influence a federal election by using clearly falsified documents.
[Updated at 11:22 a.m.: Rather’s attorneys said they plan to appeal. “We are extremely disappointed with the Appellate Court’s decision,” Martin R. Gold, Rather’s lead attorney, said in a statement. “ We believe the decision is incorrect on a number of grounds and, accordingly, we intend to ask the New York Court of Appeals to review it.”]
And that’s the way it is.
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2009/09/29/2009-09-29_appeals_court_tosses_dan_rathers_70m_suit_against_cbs.html
Appeals court tosses Dan Rather’s $70M suit against CBS
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/judge_tosses_newsman_cbs_claim_K7dEZ373fuRxPPggN5azTJ
Judge tosses newsman’s $70M CBS claim
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aVmFT.XDxSwg
CBS Wins Dismissal of Rather’s Lawsuit Over Firing
It’s like the end of the Iran-Iraq or Soviet-Nazi war. You hate to see it end and wish they both could lose.
I wanted to see it get at least to discovery - so that we could find out what they knew and when they knew it.
Thanks for the ping.
I see the LA Times doesn't put bias in their stories anymore. /s
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118009313.html?categoryid=14&cs=1
Judge dismisses Dan Rather lawsuit
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/court-dismisses-rather-suit-against-cbs/
Court Dismisses Rather Suit Against CBS
SuhWEET! LOL!
cue the violin music
Yeah. Right.
Because its not nice to gloat...I’m going to exercise “fake but accurate” gloating...
HA HA (but not really)
Yea, go ahead Dan. Appeal all you want. Spend your money.
why did CBS keep him for so long. When he replace Cronkite, his ratings were #1, but he quickly slipped into third and stayed there for the rest of his tenure. In MLB he’d have been sent to the minors or traded
Dan Blather ended his “journalism” career with the word courage.
I have another word for you Dan: dismissed!
sucks to be Dan!
Suck it up Dan. The perky cheerleader who replaced you is still on the job, filling your man-sized shoes. How does that make you feel knowing she was a first grader when you covered Kennedy’s assassination and was in high school when you covered Watergate?
Brutal! LOL!
One day Kenneth will reveal the frequency.
OK, I'm over it.
Wow, now he's disgraced and probably broke as well...
In the real world of business, Rather would have been fired and never recommended for hiring elsewhere.
How does one do that?
When contacted by a new, prospective employer, the new place asked this important question:
Is this person eligible for re-hire?
If answer is a firm NO, then the new prospective employer knows there was trouble you are not allowed to discuss by law. In Calif, you can only state that a person was let go because of theft or drugs. Anything else cannot be stated. But the above works JUST FINE.
In the real world of business, Rather would have been fired and never recommended for hiring elsewhere.
How does one do that?
When contacted by a new, prospective employer, the new place asked this important question:
Is this person eligible for re-hire?
If answer is a firm NO, then the new prospective employer knows there was trouble you are not allowed to discuss by law. In Calif, you can only state that a person was let go because of theft or drugs. Anything else cannot be stated. But the above works JUST FINE.
It looks to me like Dan’s brain is fried and his lawyers are laughing all the way to the bank. I’d feel sorry for the man if he hadn’t turned out to be a lying SOB.
Oh, I forget. The lies he told and false documents he presented “could” have true and genuine. I think I’m gonna get a Bromo to settle my tummy down a bit.
Poor Dan.............now all he has is 50 million dollars.
Yo Danny boy, best put a little ice on that...
Rather's sworn discovery would have been devastating to him. It would have forced him to look into a clear mirror.
There are sooooo many things that would have been raised to show Rather was not stable enough to be trusted to do a story. I saw some first hand, and they would have been fatal to his case, and his image.
Yes. Rather tried to bluff The Suits into a settlement and it didn’t work.
Likely too, the courts were not very interested in exposing what they know took place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.