Posted on 06/17/2007 6:25:09 AM PDT by MindBender26
A group of local lawyers all went to dinner least night.
Topic was Nifong and the damages NC will pay to the accused. There are questions of sovereign immunity, of course, and other issues but we all agreed that this was only the tip of the litigious iceberg.
In the civil litigation that is sure to follow, Nifong is one target, with few dollars, etc. The real targets will be the Duke 88. These are the professors who signed the now infamous letter adjudging the lacrosse players guilty and worse. That letter was then published as a full page ad in local newspapers and reprinted across the country..
These professors acted as individuals, with no corporate protection, insurance or shield. They acted outside their employment by Duke, etc. As such, they can be attacked and picked off, one at a time, with full and unrestricted individual liability, as targets of libel, slander and false light litigation. With no insurance, they wil even have to pay for their own lawyers.
Plaintiffs are well within statute of limitations.
Of course, as soon as one professor is served, he/she will go running to his/her lawyer. Their lawyer will play “let’s make a deal” by implicating others. Then they will sue the most hated professor, which will set the high dollar damages expectation for the rest of the cases. Others will then want to settle fast.
Even better, each of the three plaintiffs cam move separately against all 88 individually. The profs will fold like a house of cards.
Lots of fun. Big dollars.
I cant wait to see these kids sue the sh$t out of these radical professors. There hatred for the white male knows no bounds. What is so ironic is that most of these professors are white males themselves. It must be something in the genes of the liberal western European white male that they loathe anything that is white and male. To be so “self hating” and “guilt ridden” is a mental disorder just like liberalism.
To act prematurely is a common, if not sure, characteristic of recklessness. The Group of 88 acted prematurely and thus with reckless disregard for the consequences their statements and the motive for those statements was malicious under common understandings of that term, and under the term of art, "malice", applied to defamation, intended to directly harm the the accused. That is my opinion.
I'm generally against litigation, but I think this is a case where it is clearly called for.
There is no need to name them specifically, especially in a false light action.
Time to sell all those Nietzsche paperbacks.
Thanks for the hopeful news!
And if you are wrong, should they be able to sue you?
Your opinion could be regarded as slanderous. Don't you think it should be protected under the First Amendment?
>>>>There is no lawsuit here. Anyone who thinks there is doesn’t understand first amendment law. It was in very poor taste for Duke professionals to sign onto a letter in which there was a pervading assumption of guilt. The letter is irresponsible to a degree that the administrators could take action—but most likely will not have the inclination, fortitude, or practical power to do so. Unless the students stand up, that’s where it ends.
Actually, no. There are textbook matters involving the torts of “false light and “outrage.”
Actually, no. Counties are instrumentalities of the states. Counties and positions such as Nifongs are set up by State law. It was POTSONC v. Seigalman, et. al., not People of Durham County v. Seigalman...
State is firmly and primarily on the hook.
None of the three students are residents of North Carolina...so wouldn’t this fall under federal jurisdiction?
“Since the ad was written, it can be considered libel, not slander. Libel is far more serious.”
Thanks for the lawyerly correction and thereby just substitute “libel” for each of my uses of “slander” and know that my general sentiments remain unchanged - that the pursuit of the professors will make the greatest contribution to everyone if the loss of their positions is offered as means to “pay” their debt.
They are not “professors” in my book and they do not deserve their places at academic podiums in front of America’s children. They are part of the new “Brown Shirts” that operate all over academia in America today.
Then these kids will probably lose their case.
Nifong was an employee of the county. I think the link to the state is tenuous. I'll stand by my statement.
Counties are sovereign entities. They are individually responsible for the actions of their employees. Nifong was a county employee. The nexus to the State of North Carolina is tenuous. There is a direct Nexus to the County of Durham.
When you dial overseas, you have to use the country code.Meaning the amount they are going to sue for will have the same amount of digits as a phone number.Ex. 011 64 35 72 78 04
Great !!!
Your definition of malice has no basis in law.
Even if it does, the Federal Court would apply North Carolina tort law.
What does this mean?
The “88” couldn’t help themselves”
Is this the same as the pedophile who says the same thing???
funny isnt it?
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.