Posted on 09/26/2011 9:09:51 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
Just got off on the phone with a friend in the legal field and she says that a potential lawsuit against Random House by anyone of the Palin family involved in the "trash book" will most likely be quietly settled out of court because the idiot McGinniss opened up Random House to a whole lot of trouble and gives the Palin's an upper hand and GIFT in Court because McGinniss waived attorney client privileged between him and RH by talking about it to a third party (Jesse Griffin) and thus Palin's lawyers are entitled to ALL correspondence from Random House concerning the book.
My friend say that Random House may have a lot of leftists there and may hate Sarah Palin with a passion but its pure suicide for them legally to open up their correspondences in the "discovery phase"....they may have more damning info in those correspondence that was meant only for "Random House Eye's Only".
She said Random House and Jon Meachem may do a kabuki dance in the public defending the book and its "sourcing" on these false allegation but behind the scenes they will most likely quickly call for a settlement before the case got to discovery phase or even before the case is brought forth.
Legally, The Palin family has Random House and Joe McGinniss is a terrible legal bind.
(Sarah, Will that be in 20's or 100 dollar bills?)
Impeachments have happened for less.
I'm investing in popcorn futures...
Duh! When McGinnniss signed on with RH...their lawyers were involved with him and the book, legally. he thus opened all legal avenue when he talked to a third party about the process
Not a ‘Threat’: Palin Lawyer Gives McGinniss, Random House Legal Notice
Plus in my post I said a “potential” lawsuit
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2784123/posts
The attorneys can deliver to Tod Palin legal tittle to the property known as Random House or the Palins go to court and demand an award equal to the book value of the parent company and all subsidiaries.
I love it!
You sure bought Joe’s lies hook line and sinker with that comment.
I don’t know of any jurisdiction that would consider that a waiver of privilege. Besides, she’d be a fool to pursue legal action if she wants to run. She is already considered a quitter by many (myself included). A lawsuit would simply have others labelling her a whiner.
You have no clue! Whatever!
My 10 year old can formulate a better reply than that. If she wants to run with the big dogs, she has to have a thicker skin. And what harm has been done anyway? Even the NYT has said that the book is nothing but unfounded rumor. She’d have to show someone read it and believed it,and there is no one out there pointing to this book as evidence or proof of anything.
I agree with your friend. The fact that attorney-client priviledge has been broken is huge. At this stage, it’s more about the settlement and what it constitutes.
I would envision:
(1) Profits made off book sales
(2) Cease and desist all promotional and commercial activities associated with the book including, destruction of all unsold printed books and manuscripts, and all reprinting and reproduction activities
(3) Damages - wide open. You have a very well known prominent public figure and all of her family members cited in the book either as targets or as alleged sources. This has got to be upper six figures just for this category.
If the allegations are untrue, she calls her Lawyer and sues for defamation.
Now, what did Governor Palin just do?
You have no clue again! Because you are ignorant of basic facts surrounding the potential case. But I’m not going to lead you like a child when you can look it up for yourself
The only problem is #1 ——— the profits made off the sale of the book could be less than 100 bucks! Lol!
You’re as whiny as she is. Make your argument, back it up, and stop whining.
Another one. Geez, give it up.
Having read his smoking-gun e-mail, I can see how it opens him up to a lawsuit, as he admits having no evidence for several claims (that I assume made it in the book — his e-mail says they wouldn’t end up in his book unless he found evidence).
And I see that he says RH lawyers were reviewing his book, and he claims they were giving him a hard time about not providing evidence for some of the personal stuff about Palin’s family.
But I don’t see how that transmission from RH to him would be considered “attorney-client” communication; the lawyers were reviewing to protect RH, not McGuiness; the revelation of their communication wouldn’t be a waiver of A-C privilege, since he wasn’t the paying client for those lawyers.
What his statement DOES is provide an in to get e-mails from RH, because it gives the expectation that there is something there that shows malfeasance. I guess to the degree someone might have TRIED to claim A-C privilege for mail between a lawyer and someone who wasn’t a client, this will make it harder, although I can’t imagine any lawyer trying to claim A-C privilege on behalf of external communication.
The argument would be like if I was suing someone, and their lawyer wrote me a letter on behalf of their client, and I released the letter to the media — that certainly wouldn’t waive the A-C privilege between the target of my suit and their lawyers.
I’m not arguing about the underlying case. It’s just that nothing in the Palin Attorney letter says anything about any breaking of A-C privilege, and their arguments in the letter don’t seem at all to be based on A-C privilege, but simply on the knowledge of communication from RH to the author that suggests RH knew at some point that allegations were unsupported by evidence.
I mean, we’ll all know eventually, but I just don’t see how A-C privilege could enter as an issue based on the Palin attorney e-mail, or the e-mail from McGuiness to the blogger.
Interestingly, if McGuiness wasn’t such an idiot (as it seems he is), if he had actually left out the specific allegations he cites in the e-mail he sent, the e-mail could actually be used as a defense for him, since it makes it sound like he CARED about finding evidence, and would reject things that didn’t have evidence; his problem is that apparently (I say apparently because I have no idea what is in his book, as I have ignored everything about it assuming it all to be false and lurid) he DID end up including some of these allegations in his book.
Some slimy Dude writes a book saying my Wife had an affair with my coworker. The Dude goes on to write that my Wife used Drugs, when in fact she detests drug use. He writes untrue things about my Children.
I decide the sue the Dude into bankruptcy rather than put him into an early grave.
Now, pretend you are me. Are you going to stand up for yourself and your Family, or are you just a whiner? Geez...
BTW, it is a basic tenet of legal representation — when you decide to enter into a contract with someone else, THEIR lawyer is NEVER representing YOU, no matter how much you wish it were true. They will give you legal advice at times, but it is not in YOUR best interest, but in their own client’s best interest. They don’t work for you, they owe you nothing, and you are a fool not to have your own lawyer to protect your interests.
The RH lawyers were involved with the book on behalf of RH, to protect RH. Not the author. He should have had his own lawyer.
You’re on the wrong site. The PDS posse meets at DU. Whiny (chuckle) ...God, talk about clueless irony....
“Waaaahhh!!! She’s a quiterrrrr!!!”
Defense rests, your Honor.
My argument is in the original post on this thread - I don’t have time for lazy people that needs everything explained to them when it’s right in front of them
Palins lawyers believe it opens up all correspondence that RH has about the book and Mcaginniss over him breaking attorney client priviledge
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.