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 ...
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.
Just finished this one the other day.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ma—NDKJkk0C&dq=edward+r+murrow+sperber&source=gbs_navlinks_s
Murrow, his life and times
By Ann M. Sperber
Very interesting - lots of history on the formation of CBS News.
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.fraud... a completely proper result of this would have been the bailiff leading Rather and his lawyer(s) out of the courtroom and placed in stocks in the town square.
LOL, who but the Democrat "mainstream" newsrooms could call Rather's fraudulent smear job a "controversial story"?
courage
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.