Court dismisses Hardwick lawsuit vs. Geno

[JS]

Appeal Filed


Looks like the lawyer is making it all about Geno.....

Geesh. He's doubling down on his right to be in NY court rather than advising her to go elsewhere, such as CT, where there's good jurisdiction.

Saves some face with the client, one supposes. But in the process, his comments to the press:

• show disrespect for the law by describing the governing law of the very issue he's arguing as "legal technicalities;"
• minimize the court's decision saying the judge is just "expressing her opinion" (he knows the popular connotation of arbitrariness in that word; but legally speaking what else does a judge do, having decided a case, but write the "opinion of the court?");
• seem to confuse civil with criminal proceedings ("he'll be on trial"); and
• as Biff says, make it all about Geno. What happened to the other defendants? Charitably, one can only posit that the conversation with Rich Elliott was focused on Geno because that was Rich's interest.

To top it off, he takes parting shots that sound like a thwarted movie villain. "This is not the end for Mr. Auriemma. It's just the beginning. The case isn't over. Not by a long shot."

Yeah. We'll meet again, Mr. Bond, and next time you won't be so lucky.

 

[Biff]

"

Yeah. We'll meet again, Mr. Bond, and next time you won't be so lucky.

(Paraphrasing Goldfinger)

Geno: Do you expect me to settle Mr.McLaughlin ?
Mr. McLaughlin: No Mr. Auriemma, I expect you to die!

 

[UcMiami]

Most of her case rests on purported personal actions taken by Geno, and an alleged conspiracy between him, USA basketball, and her employer, so yes, it is mostly about Geno.
And while I know next to nothing about the law, I do somehow hope that the judge has read the following statements by this lawyer:

"Her decision's based on what's popularly called `legal technicalities,'​

"`The decision is incorrect,'' McLaughlin said. ​

And I hope she can find some 'legal technicalities' to slap him with a contempt charge.

 

[rbny1]

I do somehow hope that the judge has read the following statements by this lawyer: "Her decision's based on what's popularly called `legal technicalities,'"

The legal technicality is that her lawyer filed the case in the wrong venue. That's a pretty big technicality.

 

[Plumber Luigi]

(Paraphrasing Goldfinger)

Geno: Do you expect me to settle Mr.McLaughlin ?
Mr. McLaughlin: No Mr. Auriemma, I expect you to pay!

Fixed.

 

[OneTrickPony]

I expect you to pay!

The plumber's answer to every problem...

 

[Bestiarius]

Disclaimer regarding legal advise given herein:

No representation is made by The Boneyard (Hereafter BY) that services are superior to any other legal services. We are not all attorneys. Void where prohibited by law. Taxes not included. Consult with your physician before using. Some shrinkage is normal. You should try on a small, hidden area of your comment to test for color-fastness, before you use it here. Do not remove this tag under penalty of law. Not affiliated in any way with the accounting firm of Price Waterhouse. This fine print is intended to be read and not misused in any way. Reading of fine print may cause eyestrain. Take a trip to the beach or a vacation and your eyes will clear up right away. BY offers that advice as a service to our readers. We are not professional vacation advisors, nor are we licensed travel agents. Regarding our warning about eyestrain: We are not eye-care professionals, nor do we aspire to be. We do, however, aspire to be veterinary ventriloquists and part-time ballet divos & divas. Note: Our statement that we do not desire to be eye-care professionals is not intended as a criticism of eye-care professionals, who cheerfully provide excellent services to their patients. However, the preceding positive statement about eye-care professionals should not be regarded as an endorsement. Thank you.

 

[UConnNick]

Her original complaint alleged violations of New York State and City human rights laws. After the Olympics she amended it to add a claim of assault. This is the "injury" the court speaks of in assessing where (for jurisdictional purposes) the alleged wrongful act took place.

It is not a physical injury in this sense. The court means simply the harm complained of.

Bear in mind that, for legal purposes, an assault is not what the average person thinks it is. It's basically only a threat to do imminent violence, such as waving a club at someone. If accompanied by actual touching, such as hitting, it becomes an "assault and battery."

Specifically, Hardwick alleged that Geno "screamed" at her and pointed his finger at her in a threatening manner.

According to the allegation, he was demanding she move from where she was sitting in the stands at a practice. This was part of an ongoing dispute they had over where she sat (too close in his opinion) and how involved she got (cheering, etc.).

Her characterizations of "screaming" and the ominous pointing (I'm sure she was terrified) are of course rather subjective.

As I see it, he may not have wanted cheers for particular plays in practice (maybe they were good plays in her eyes, but not in his), or for any plays, found them a distraction and interference and didn't want her participation.

And that's aside from whether she was doing her job as a security officer. One can imagine that while playing the involved fan she'd have noticed a terrorist only if he came up and tapped her on the shoulder.

If it's true that this woman was cheering at practice sessions, that's not just totally unprofessional, it's also against the rules. I've sat in many press boxes and attended many practice sessions, and I can assure you that cheering by media members or anyone else in those settings is against the rules, and would subject anyone doing it to being thrown out. I've never once seen any security personnel cheering, even in locations outside of the press box where nobody or only a tiny handful of folks would have known if they were. I'd also think that a security guard should be spending more time watching what's going on off the court than on it during such sessions if they're charged with the responsibility of protecting the participants. Potential threats are going to come from off the court, not on it.

 

[CL82]

This case demonstrates a lot about what is wrong with US Civil justice...

It got thrown out so it also demonstrates a lot about what it right with it.

 

[OneTrickPony]

It got thrown out so it also demonstrates a lot about what it right with it.

When Geno is made whole, I'll agree.,..