Infamous "Duke 88" (Professors Who Adjudged Lacross Guilty) To be Huge Civil Suit Targets

Dinner with other lawyers | MB26

[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.

[elhombrelibre]

Tar and feathers are too kind for these scoundrels.

[jude24]

They signed those letters in their official capacity as University Professors.

It's arguable whether or not the letters were within the scope of their employment, or were done in their private capacity. I don't think respondeat superior applies here - the statements were not made within the context of their educational duties, but in their individual capacities as faculty members who made no claim to represent their employer in this matter.

Even so, any prosecution here could not establish the elements of the cause of action. It would necessarily fail.

[OKIEDOC]

Nice post.

I hope they take these gang of 88 to the proverbial cleaners right along with Duke University and the city of Durham.

I hope the settlements for these boys are so astronomical that it makes the tobacco lawsuits look like Jimmuh Carter peanuts.

[Mere]

You are probably right about Duke not being responsible but it would be nice because Duke allowed this to happen. Would love to have a situation where Duke told them to not do it and they did it anyway.

[MindBender26]

>>>>Stop and think about this. I’m trying this case against 40 born out of state fuzzy heads who have to pay their own lawyers.

>>The University and the insurance company for the University will provide the lawyers. They signed those letters in their official capacity as University Professors. They were not immediately terminated, so the University will be presumed to have authorized their statements.

Presumption, on what grounds? How did this letter relate to their teaching duties? Was it within their primary teaching area? Was it approved by any supervisor at Duke? Did it meet Duke's standards for equity and fairness in public statements? Did Duke offer an official apology when charges were dismissed? When asked about this by reporters early on, did Duke, at that time, say the letter was issued under their umbrella of repsopjsibility?

>>And as for your theory of divide and conquer, that would never work because every one of them will have the same lawyer, provided by the taxpayers of the State of North Carolina and the liability insurance carrier for the University.

Sorry, but Duke is not a State school. As far as the insurance company “volunteering” to defend this? An insurance company? Their policy is certainly not “all risk.” Surely you jest!?!?!

Duke take this on? Alumni contribution would dry up within 24 hours!!!! “I gave my money so your could hire lawyers to defend crazy professors who fanned the flames of this??? I want my money back!”

As for them hiring a single lawyer, they will be fighting among themselves within 90 days. Some will get another lawyer to settle quickly. They get a 20% as opposed to 35% deal, but the offer for everyone else goes to 45%...

I’m not admitted in NC, but if I was their lawyer, we win this in a cake walk.

[LeGrande]

As far as the Ad goes, by itself it certainly isn’t actionable. What it will do is buttress the case that can be made against some of the professors who organized, spoke at, and attended rallies against the players. Some of the professors publicly slandered the players in their classroom and gave them intentionally lowered grades.

If the players can document the above mentioned activities then I think that they have a case. IIRC there were two or three particularly notorious teachers.

Duke has already settled out of court with the fired coach. I would also expect Duke to settle with each of the players too.

I think that the players case against the State is poor, in light of the action the state took against Nifong.

Their best case of course is against Crystal and Nifong, but I seem to recall something about getting blood out of a turnip.

[Mere]

I agree with your statements, especially this one:

“I’m not admitted in NC, but if I was their lawyer, we win this in a cake walk.”

Would love to have this one also but just think of the fun you would have in deposition? Requests for admissions that demonstrate how left wing they are??

What fun. Only if I did not have to make a living (and a little thing like the Carolina bar...

[Lee'sGhost]

Did you catch this one? I keep smiling and thinking “poetic justice.”

[Hoodat]

I grew up in the shadow of UVA and was the first of my family who didn't attend either there or Mary Washington. What personal UVA experience encourages you to cheer these boys on?

Incidentally, I find it interesting that Nifong, a graduate of UNC at Chapel Hill, was the one going after Duke. Conflict of interest, maybe?

[OKIEDOC]

Don’t cha know these 88 will not need any kind of laxative for a long while.

I would bet after the Nifong verdict these @$$holes were loose as a goose, cowering in fear of what is to come.

[P-Marlowe]

It's arguable whether or not the letters were within the scope of their employment, or were done in their private capacity.

It is clear that the University is liable if the professors are. Here is the introduction to the ad:

We thank the following departments and programs for signing onto this ad with African & African American Studies: Romance Studies; Psychology: Social and Health Sciences; Franklin Humanities Institute; Critical U.S. Studies; Art, Art History, and Visual Studies; Classical Studies; Asian & African Languages & Literature; Women’s Studies; Latino/a Studies; Latin American and Caribbean Studies; Medieval and Renaissance Studies; European Studies; Program in Education; and the Center for Documentary Studies. Because of space limitations, the names of individual faculty and staff who signed on in support may be read at the AAAS website:http://www.duke.edu/web/africanameric/

If a lawsuit is filed, the insurance company for the University will be required to defend. They may cancel their policy, but they will defend.

[Lee'sGhost]

“What is best in life? To crush your enemies. To see them driven before you. And to hear the lamentations of their women...”

Conan the Barbarian

[JCEccles]

No way you establish from any of these witnesses recklessness regarding the truth of their statements. If defamation were a strict liability offense, you might have a case. With the scienter requirement, you'd never win - and be subject to Fed.R.Civ.P Rule 11 sanctions, and probably malicious prosecution counter-suits.

You're full of cheap baloney and hot air.

[ProudCopperhead]

Bust the leftist creeps hard and fast. Make it hurt.

[Hoodat]

Oops, just saw your Post 153. I also was an engineering major (Georgia Tech). Being an engineering major, I was able to avoid quite a bit of academia’s leftist brainwashing. However, I did have one engineering professor who lowered my grade from an A to a C because I dared question how many women’s deaths would it take before the FDA banned mifepristone.

[ProudCopperhead]

It couldn’t have been said better.

[ProudCopperhead]

Rule 11 is seldom invoked.

Is there somewhere a full, accurate, unedited and unannotated text of the letter?

[MindBender26]

>>>>It is clear that the University is liable if the professors are. Here is the introduction to the ad:

>>>>We thank the following departments and programs for signing onto this ad with African & African American Studies: Romance Studies; Psychology: Social and Health Sciences; Franklin Humanities Institute; Critical U.S. Studies; Art, Art History, and Visual Studies; Classical Studies; Asian & African Languages & Literature; Women’s Studies; Latino/a Studies; Latin American and Caribbean Studies; Medieval and Renaissance Studies; European Studies; Program in Education; and the Center for Documentary Studies. Because of space limitations, the names of individual faculty and staff who signed on in support may be read at the AAAS website:http://www.duke.edu/web/africanameric/

The question becomes who at these departments, and in what capacity, “signed on.” If someone with authority to do so “signed on” with the intent and authorization to do so signed officially for the University, then probably the school is on.

And of course, since these departments are not “legal persons”, then who is bound?

If it was not person with such authroity, acting in such capacity, then school is not placed on simply by this statement. The statement in the ad does not make school liable. Other things might, but this statement, unsupported, does not.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Nifong is truly scum, who deserves what he’s going to get. I hope he gets it extra hard.

[MarkT]

I have read my policy and, indeed, used its defense provisions in a commercial endeavor and this is only civil insofar as far as the professors are concerned. This was intentional only in the context that the professors wanted their views known. It was not physical or actions conducted in a criminal context.

The companies will and must defend and that is to the benefit of the plaintiffs, the kids libelled. This is like a crack in a dam - it takes time but it all works out in the end. The insurance companies will defend, pay and then cancel.