The quandry Ole Miss faces.....
- Thread starter HD6
- Start date
It means to me, nobody wants to go into the court room
Upon Information and Belief""...means something is probably there, but proving it is something else.
I've seen this more than once, not an easy go.
Upon Information and Belief""...means something is probably there, but proving it is something else.
I've seen this more than once, not an easy go.
Because he's trying real hard to not reach it
He needs to learn to stay out of trouble or he may be hanging out with Sidney in a few years
He needs to learn to stay out of trouble or he may be hanging out with Sidney in a few years
Nah, we settle nonmeritorious lawsuits all the time. Settlements don't mean jack. It often costs more to defend cases than settle them, so it makes financial sense.
The defendant still gets to say he denies the allegations but is ready to move on, etc. You get a confidentiality agreement so that the amount can't be disclosed. Sure, some will still draw that inference of liability, but that's just not the way it works in the real world.
The defendant still gets to say he denies the allegations but is ready to move on, etc. You get a confidentiality agreement so that the amount can't be disclosed. Sure, some will still draw that inference of liability, but that's just not the way it works in the real world.
So in this case how does a college student with no assets or income scrape up enough cash to settle this nonmeritorious lawsuit and "move on".
Wrong. You are looking at this from the standpoint of a corp
Not an individual that has his reputation and potentially millions of dollars to earn. Someone brings a case against you that you know is complete ********, you are going to offer me a settlement? Yeah, right....
But, if I walk into a walmart and slip and fall, they don't want workplace safety to be pulled into the conversation where they could be looking at a class action...
Huge difference....
Not an individual that has his reputation and potentially millions of dollars to earn. Someone brings a case against you that you know is complete ********, you are going to offer me a settlement? Yeah, right....
But, if I walk into a walmart and slip and fall, they don't want workplace safety to be pulled into the conversation where they could be looking at a class action...
Huge difference....
I'm simply saying a settlement has little, if anything, to do with whether the allegations are true or false. In terms of reputation and earning capacity there's a lot to be said for putting a suit to bed so it's not still pending when you're draft eligible.
Seeing as how the complaint lists the plaintiff as being from St. Simons Island, Ga. I doubt the couple million (much less a settlement) has anything to do with it. Takes more than a pretty penny to reside there. They're most likely out to damage a few reputations as retribution for whatever happened rather than collect some cash.
Last edited:
If they did settle, wouldn't the question still be hanging out there, were they guilty or not guilty? Seems to me it would. I would think if there is a settlement then OM Mission Control, I think you have a problem. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think this highly reputable Memphis Law Firm is in the mix for the results to end up in a settlement. I think they have too much at stake to approach it with that mindset, and if they remotely thought it would end like that, I think they would never have taken the case.
Most people do not carry insurance that would cover the cost of their defense if they committed an assault and battery. I will be curious to see how these student athletes pay for their attorneys. If some lawyer represents them for no fee, a reduce fee, or a deferred fee, I would think that it would be an impermissible benefit under NCAA rules. I will be very interested to see what law firm represents them.
The lawsuit was written in a way that, at least initially, the defendants' parents' homeowners' policy will probably defend them under a reservation of rights (it's why there was one "negligence" claim). Probably won't pay any of the judgment/settlement though.
To get a Farese, you gotta throw down some change.
Wasn't "Quandry" one of Rocket Ismail's brothers?...
Wasn't "Quandry" one of Rocket Ismail's brothers?...
Yes, but you don't settle in this situation if you know you did nothing wrong
Why would you settle? Both sides have money. Both sides are upper middle class at the worst. IF you bring this case, you are not seeking to settle. You are seeking to make someone admit they were wrong. If you are Kimdeeche, why would you settle? A settlement in a lot of cases makes sense, not this one. Kimdeeche has to then explain it in every interview from now on because whether you want to admit it or not (and whether it is true or not), Settlement = Guilt. Especially in the eyes of most of the public. If you are truly innocent and know you have nothing to hide, you fight this to the death if you have money. You make that SOB admit in court that you did nothing wrong.
Why would you settle? Both sides have money. Both sides are upper middle class at the worst. IF you bring this case, you are not seeking to settle. You are seeking to make someone admit they were wrong. If you are Kimdeeche, why would you settle? A settlement in a lot of cases makes sense, not this one. Kimdeeche has to then explain it in every interview from now on because whether you want to admit it or not (and whether it is true or not), Settlement = Guilt. Especially in the eyes of most of the public. If you are truly innocent and know you have nothing to hide, you fight this to the death if you have money. You make that SOB admit in court that you did nothing wrong.
I think the biggest quandry for UM is this:
Is every frat boy from the KA house that is called and sworn in under oath going to toe the company line? This is not the same as a University police officer looking around a crowded frat house and saying "Anyone see anything? Anyone want to give a statement?" Then all of them look at their shoes and hope it goes away. If the plaintiff's attorney is worth anything (which evidence seems to show that they are), they will depose every person that was there, many that weren't there and anyone that gets a little nervous is golden to them...
Is every frat boy from the KA house that is called and sworn in under oath going to toe the company line? This is not the same as a University police officer looking around a crowded frat house and saying "Anyone see anything? Anyone want to give a statement?" Then all of them look at their shoes and hope it goes away. If the plaintiff's attorney is worth anything (which evidence seems to show that they are), they will depose every person that was there, many that weren't there and anyone that gets a little nervous is golden to them...
Will there be lingering question of guilt after a settlement....
Of course there will be questions of guilt in peoples minds no matter what. In the eyes of the law? Almost certainly not. In virtually every civil settlement it goes with no admission of guilt by the defendants. Most importantly, the university would have no basis to consider anyone guilty of anything and there would be no jeopardy whatsoever on their athletic eligibility.
Mark my words, this suit will be settled. Win or lose the athletics program does not want the testimony from this trial, and the athletes names who were there, splashed all over the news every night for several weeks. Monies will be made available, a generous but undisclosed offer will be made and accepted by the plaintiff and all will be forgotten. We will never know but my guess is that it will take about 250-500K to settle.
Of course there will be questions of guilt in peoples minds no matter what. In the eyes of the law? Almost certainly not. In virtually every civil settlement it goes with no admission of guilt by the defendants. Most importantly, the university would have no basis to consider anyone guilty of anything and there would be no jeopardy whatsoever on their athletic eligibility.
Mark my words, this suit will be settled. Win or lose the athletics program does not want the testimony from this trial, and the athletes names who were there, splashed all over the news every night for several weeks. Monies will be made available, a generous but undisclosed offer will be made and accepted by the plaintiff and all will be forgotten. We will never know but my guess is that it will take about 250-500K to settle.
I don't see why Freeze would come out and make that statement without knowing the Nkemdiches would not settle and would fight it.
Question back: would this board have more of a field day with his current statement or a "no comment" statement?
Question back: would this board have more of a field day with his current statement or a "no comment" statement?
High profile athletes settle cases all the time with little impact on their reputation or earning capacity. It has less to do with whether the allegations are true than whether the athlete wants to spend the time, money, and endure the potential negative publicity and distractions of a public trial; or pay to put the matter to bed, in which case no one will even be talking about it 6 months later.
But I realize that regardless of what I say you're going to continue to believe that a settlement in this case would be tantamount to proof that the allegations are true, and that's fine. Keep believing that. I'm just telling you that's not the way it works in the real world, and any MSU attorney would tell you the same thing if he's being honest.
But I realize that regardless of what I say you're going to continue to believe that a settlement in this case would be tantamount to proof that the allegations are true, and that's fine. Keep believing that. I'm just telling you that's not the way it works in the real world, and any MSU attorney would tell you the same thing if he's being honest.
If he would have said that, his comment would have been dissected just as much. It's what he says before any of this with his "faith based" approach that makes everything so magnified.
Is there an origin to the "faith based" quote which is always attributed to Freeze? I'm not trying to be a smartass, but it's become accepted truth that Freeze said he uses "faith-based recruiting." And maybe he did say that and I've just never seen the link. (I'm not disputing that he openly promotes Christian values, just asking when/where he said he uses "faith-based recruiting.")
Someone was quoted as saying it - http://muckrack.com/HKellenbergerCL/statuses/290493400321511424
It's an archived article on the CL. http://www.clarionledger.com/articl...on-s-Jones-develops-into-state-s-top-prospect
It's an archived article on the CL. http://www.clarionledger.com/articl...on-s-Jones-develops-into-state-s-top-prospect
Nah, man... He was all in way back in February of 2013.
When the bash brothers were exonerated, the die was cast. The moment they were found innocent there was no going back. Having to crawfish on that proclamation would bring the house down. ...It would ultimately cost him his job. He can't open the door for questions now.
If they're completely innocent, then good for Freeze for standing up for his dudes a year ago and again now.
But if they're not... It'll become a national story and Freeze won't survive it.
When the bash brothers were exonerated, the die was cast. The moment they were found innocent there was no going back. Having to crawfish on that proclamation would bring the house down. ...It would ultimately cost him his job. He can't open the door for questions now.
If they're completely innocent, then good for Freeze for standing up for his dudes a year ago and again now.
But if they're not... It'll become a national story and Freeze won't survive it.
I can appreciate what you are arguing but you are still not based correctly
in this argument...
We aren't talking about an All-Pro safety for the Packers being sued. We are talking about a big time recruit that his university has put their neck on the line for at this point. I honestly cannot recall a time where a university or a coach has so completely stuck their neck on the line for someone in this way. (maybe Chizik for Newton but that wasn't close to the same situation as far as the legal standpoint)...
The argument of whether a settlement means fault is just a common sense argument. I am not really saying something that we all do not feel. Not even about this case... Most times, we, as a society, feel that someone that chooses to write a check versus defend their honor in court is saying that they are guilty to at least some degree. I think this is amplified in this case where you have two families that really do not have the typical 'gain' on the side of the prosecution (a large sum of money for a poor family) and we don't have the typical loss on the side of the defense (this isn't a criminal trial where they could go to jail if all went wrong). So, to me, with that being said, I say again... Why would you be quick to settle if you KNOW you are innocent? You are defending your 'honor' and would be able to prove it. Hell, if you are Kimdeeche in this situation, you were there. Pictures prove you were there. A guy gets his *** whipped. He went to the hospital. You or others should at the very least be able to say who actually did the *** whipping. The fact that no one is saying anything leads most of us to believe there is at least some truth to this. No one saying anything when something obviously happened is not a rosey endorsement.
in this argument...
We aren't talking about an All-Pro safety for the Packers being sued. We are talking about a big time recruit that his university has put their neck on the line for at this point. I honestly cannot recall a time where a university or a coach has so completely stuck their neck on the line for someone in this way. (maybe Chizik for Newton but that wasn't close to the same situation as far as the legal standpoint)...
The argument of whether a settlement means fault is just a common sense argument. I am not really saying something that we all do not feel. Not even about this case... Most times, we, as a society, feel that someone that chooses to write a check versus defend their honor in court is saying that they are guilty to at least some degree. I think this is amplified in this case where you have two families that really do not have the typical 'gain' on the side of the prosecution (a large sum of money for a poor family) and we don't have the typical loss on the side of the defense (this isn't a criminal trial where they could go to jail if all went wrong). So, to me, with that being said, I say again... Why would you be quick to settle if you KNOW you are innocent? You are defending your 'honor' and would be able to prove it. Hell, if you are Kimdeeche in this situation, you were there. Pictures prove you were there. A guy gets his *** whipped. He went to the hospital. You or others should at the very least be able to say who actually did the *** whipping. The fact that no one is saying anything leads most of us to believe there is at least some truth to this. No one saying anything when something obviously happened is not a rosey endorsement.