dot and for all you lawyers out there

[fsujl11]

Is there any grounds to sue this woman or are we just taking the high road at some point we need to put the foot down.

 

[danoleman]

She's desperate for a payday that's why she's doing the public thing now. She's in tremendous debt. Winston is going on with his life. What she and her lawyers are trying to do is embarrass FSU into a settlement.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Seminole Jones]

How do you know she's in debt?

 

[FSUNole07]

You don't think her lawyers are working for free, do you?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Dr Sonny]

Originally posted by FSUNole07:
You don't think her lawyers are working for free, do you?

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Intent? Not free.

Ipso facto? FREE

 

[Nole-Esq.]

Since she is already suing FSU, it would be easy enough to file a counterclaim. Perhaps fraudulent misrepresentation based on her statements in the movie.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Noleathon]

If they can prove malicious intent or reckless disregard to the truth...yes because Jameis is a public figure . However what she said under oath cannot be claimed under defamation because it is privileged.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[More Kirk Less Spock]

I was actually wondering if some enterprising FSU grad will eventually sue for ---don't really know what the cause would be, but ask for diminution in value based on her denigration of FSU.

Yes / that's the damages phase of the analysis, but if you don't have damages, how do you recover?

 

[Renegade 83]

Originally posted by Noleathon:
If they can prove malicious intent or reckless disregard to the truth...yes because Jameis is a public figure . However what she said under oath cannot be claimed under defamation because it is privileged.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

Really? What you say under oath is privileged? I'm not sure that is correct.

In order to have a viable suit I would imagine you would need concrete proof that she knew she was not raped but pursued as if she was regardless. This would be a very burdensome allegation. I would think the only thing that would be able to prove this is if she said so in any written communication, which I doubt she did (even if she told someone that would be hearsay). Also, any communication she had with her counsel would be P&C.

 

[QuaZ2002]

He's better off letting it go. It would be really hard to prove it and he would have to go to court and i'm guessing face cross examination. It's not worth the trouble. This will be over soon enough.

 

[SWFNole]

Originally posted by Dr Sonny:

Originally posted by FSUNole07:
You don't think her lawyers are working for free, do you?

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Intent? Not free.

Ipso facto? FREE

More likely they're working on contingency. Aunt Pat is SOL on a payday most likely.
Posted from Rivals Mobile