Posted on 10/07/2025 11:11:31 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
How to judge who was right or wrong on this case? Sit on a jury, it seems convoluted as hell.
He is their employee and was at that location as part of his job.
Filing a lawsuit now while the story is still in the headlines only serves to maximize the media coverage.
The driver is 69. He may not want to wait until the statute of limitations is nearly up. You can likely present a better case if memories are fresh. If it is a money grab, it is to comoensate him for being assaulted and injured. He’d likely be okay with an out of court settlement, and that might be the best for Sanchez, too.
You answered your own question.
“What does Fox have to do with it, other than deep pockets? “
They had to have known the man had a substance problem.
They directed him to Indy and paid to get him there. Probably paid the bar tab.
By now, one would think Mark Sanchez would know nothing good happens after midnight. Especially when he’s a drunk celebrity. Now his post-NFL broadcasting gig is in jeopardy.
Did they give him daily drug tests or something?
As a member of the bar for more than 30 years, I disagree. Sometimes you do wait because the damages aren’t clear. Given the age of the victim and the nature of the injuries, I think the damages are clear enough to proceed. And there is nothing wrong with strategic timing to maximize public interest and pressure on the defense. All that said, I can’t imagine what a tenable course and scope argument would be as to Fix. This didn’t happen in CA, but if it did the law here is clear that this departure from job duties won’t support vicarious liability. If I were Fox I wouldn’t offer a dime. Sanchez has plenty deep pockets to make him whole
“Did they give him daily drug tests or something? “
They will subpoena all personnel records and executive email communication to find out.
Then they will depose all his coworkers.
But as soon as those motions are filed Fox will offer to settle.
Big.
Is “Fox Corporation” now Disney? I remember Disney years ago buying out parts of Fox, but not all of it. Not Fox News and not the Fox Sports channels. But, IIRC, the portion of Fox sports that’s on the main Fox network was bought out by Disney.
Let’s just let bygones be bygones.
Should call him a “former driver.”
One of the charges against Sanchez was upgraded to a felony. His freedom might be in jeopardy as well.
Disney does not own the Fox network, Fox News Channel, or Fox sports. They bought the movie studio and non sports cable networks.
Did you see the photo of the driver in the hospital?
Nothing. There is no way the victim can show Sanchez was acting within the scope of his employment and that’s what it would take to impose vicarious liability on Fox.
That should be even easier to prove in a civil case.
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.