Posted on 07/28/2020 11:52:33 AM PDT by Signalman
This should make you smile.
I’d love to see him fired out of a Howitzer.
Hahahahahahahaha. LMAO.
Or maybe discovery will determine that he did have knowledge.
Provide all communication records, CNN.
"Well you've really built yourself up into something, haven't you?"
CNN cannot require Sandmann to abide by the terms of the non-disclosure agreement if CNN, itself, doesn’t. Unless CNN repudiates Steleter’s claims, Sandmann would be relieved of his obligation to not disclose the terms of the agreement.
“Was that wrong?” - Stelter
Presumable for this to come up the agreement must say that CNN is to not comment on their own or any other suits associated with this case and Stelter indirectly did.
All speculation on my part, of course. But see my tagline....
Very like a breach of any other contract.
a viral confrontation with a Native American elder
Uh, no he wasn't "a Native American elder".
Partisan Media Shills update.
Enter Sandman...
Say your prayers, little one
Don’t forget my son to include everyone
I tuck you in, warm within, keep you free from sin
Till the sandman he comes…
Nope but sometimes the confidentiality portion of an agreement will have added damages if the agreement is breached and such damages are easily awarded.
Yeah, “25k to go away”. What kind of low IQ person would A) Comment on a high profile case of your employer, when it under agreement not to comment and B) Believe its 25k? Laughter ensues
But Mark Dice’s impersonation of him is comedy gold!
“CNN analyst Asha Rangappa appeared to agree with Zaid as well.
“I’d guess $25K to go away,” Rangappa wrote.”
I’m not a lawyer, or anything close, but I would guess with the money Sandman got in his first settlement, his people would gladly go to court if a network floated a $25,000 settlement - heck, the discovery would be worth 25 grand all by itself.
>> Provide all communication records, CNN.
Seems ATT is happy to do that for the hostile Democrats like Schiff — Giuliani’s records for example.
CNN is ATT
Unfortunately for Sandmann, his lawyer’s complaint here suggests to me that Zaid guessed right and the settlement was for nuisance value. How else would Stelter’s retweet of Zaid’s comment violate the confidentiality clause?
Also, speaking as a plaintiff’s lawyer, it is usually the defendant, not the plaintiff, who insists on and cares about a confidentiality clause in a settlement. Plaintiffs’ lawyers like to advertise their settlements when they can. Usually, if the plaintiff’s lawyer is the one who wants to keep the settlement confidential, it’s because the settlement was for a disappointing amount.
Also, the remedy for breach of a confidentiality clause is usually rescission of the settlement, which a plaintiff would not want if the settlement was for a desirable amount. It would be pretty hard for a plaintiff to prove any damages caused by a defendant’s breach of a confidentiality clause in a settlement. Perhaps there was a big liquidated damages provision, but I doubt it.
Dump your att phone right now!
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.
