Replies

The way I understood this thing with Schmidt, is that some nameless man sold him the business. Along with that sale, he purchased all contracts and agreements. Included was Amber's agreement. So maybe they should be sueing the seller of the business if she had some verbal agreement with him. The seller could have pulled Amber's agreement and destroyed it at the time of the sale, I suppose, or given it to Amber, but he didn't.

When it got all slow, I was just gonna post to you that I must've been wrong when I thought they disputed that it was really Amber's signature. From the little that has been said of the details, I now gather that Amber's side is saying it wasn't a release she signed, but just a "data sheet", which would just be her giving information--would not be a release or contract.

And if Amber did do a valid contract with that photographer, who later sold his business, wonder if Amber's agreement with HIM is transferable to someone else? Amber's team could argue that whatever contract she may have signed with the photographer, that the present owners of his business don't have privity of contract as to her contract with the photog.

I mean, if I sign a contract with you, does that mean you can just sell it to whomever you wish, and I am obligated to THEM under the contract? I don't think so!