Dawn suing Mizzou AD

[Crossover]

True, but remember she is entitled to discovery. He will have to list his basis for his statement. She needs to prove that 1) the statement was made, 2) that wasn't true, 3) that the AD knew that, and 4)that she was damaged.

1) is a given, 2) and 3) are where discovery comes into play. If Steck's answers show he had no basis for making the statement, and especially no proof that it occurred, he's in trouble. I think you are alluding to the fact that defamation has a higher standard for public officials, and it does, but if "I have no proof, but I actually believe the statements I made" was a defense no public official would ever win a defamation case.

Excellent legal analysis .

 

[meyers7]

In a related story ...

Former UConn Player Sues Geno
"He erroneously claimed I couldn't guard a chair."​

But technically, since other than in Indiana, chairs are not allowed on the court during games, he was correct.

 

[DefenseBB]

I don't think so because I really like C Viv...!

Actually, I was going to do the exact opposite with:

I don't think so because I really like Dawn...

Dawn has a chip on her shoulder that appears every now and then and is what drives her to be great while also creating detractors. This would be better to be "let go of" and moved on from but hey, it's in her DNA to fight.

As far as CVS goes, hey, she's had a great career, congrats, now please exit stage left and take Sylvia with you...instead, she's pulling a Bobby Bowdoin...doesn't know when to leave.

 

[winlots]

But technically, since other than in Indiana, chairs are not allowed on the court during games, he was correct.

MEYERS: You know doggone well that Bobby was just tossing that chair across the court to an old lady who needed a seat. Setting yourself up for another lawsuit?

 

[Crossover]

She’s suing because she wants an apology. If it were anyone else, you’d agree it’s frivolous

In addition to being part of common parlance, "frivolous" is a legal term of art. If you are using it as the latter , I'm afraid you are mistaken. A frivolous lawsuit is one filed with no factual basis for the allegations. Filing a frivolous action can lead to sanctions being imposed on both the plaintiff and her attorney (which is why the attorney's reputation for probity matters. A lawyer who values his/her reputation is not inclined to file a frivolous suit). In this case, if Dawn did not intentionally create the atmosphere described by the AD, she has a factual basis for the second element of her claim. With respect to her allegation that the AD knew that his statement was false, or acted in reckless disregard for the truth, the court will of necessity require little by way of factual basis at the outset of the litigation . That is because the third element turns on the defendant's mindset, something that is virtually impossible for a plaintiff to know or show directly. Discovery may turn up damning comments by the AD, or facts from which the requisite mindset can be inferred. Or maybe not. I think that the complaint alleges enough to get in the door under the circumstances, hence is not frivolous. Dawn's motivations for bringing the lawsuit are legally irrelevant. That said, it strikes me that seeking an apology is morally a better reason than seeking revenge. As is seeking to reform a broken system. Finally, one of the social functions of injury to reputation cases is that they provide a public mechanism for assessing and deciding how members of a society ought to treat one another. That is something to be valued, not sneered at.

 

[meyers7]

MEYERS: You know doggone well that Bobby was just tossing that chair across the court to an old lady who needed a seat. Setting yourself up for another lawsuit?

True dat.

 

[Plebe]

I know nothing about this area of the law, but I just don't see how you can prove he knowingly made false statements. Doesn't that require you to prove a negative? That is, you would have to prove that the behavior he claims occurred did not occur and that he knew it didn't occur.

Not quite. The standard for a libel claim is “actual malice,” which means the defendant either knew his statement was false or he exercised “reckless disregard” for whether it was true.

 

[winlots]

True dat.

Terrific. You are one fancy man. 'Course that's rather widely known in these parts.

 

[Orangutan]

Not quite. The standard for a libel claim is “actual malice,” which means the defendant either knew his statement was false or he exercised “reckless disregard” for whether it was true.

Yes, this is what I have now learned. I'm heartened that I wasn't totally off the mark, though, as the article I posted above agrees that it would be hard for Dawn to win the case.

I'm a paralegal but we do commercial litigation and white collar criminal defense. Everything I know about defamation law I've learned today through google or this thread!

 

[Charliebball]

 

[Charliebball]

 

[Wbbfan1]

KC Star Column: Double Standard SEC betrays double standard in dealing with Mizzou and South Carolina

 

[01Neaggrad02]

The attorney that Dawn retained is very prominent and does not file things for frivolous nature. Saying the fans were rude is one thing. Saying that an African American women promoted an atmosphere to have people spew racism and spitting on people is out of bounds. Especially when no one viewed it on tape, no players on the actual team would say that it happened to them, nor would the coach verify those specific actions when pressed. That defames her character and since the commissioner did not act, she did what she had to do. Strange that given the suit, the commissioner finally levied the fine, because what the Mizz, AD did was in violation of a league rule and he refused to retract the statement. I get it if you are a UConn fan and do not like Dawn but look at it this way. If a the Tenn AD, not a fanbase, goes publicly on air and accused Geno of cheating to get Maya Moore with no proof than sour grapes, he would be expected to be reprimanded because it would be baseless and serve to taint something Geno has built fair and square. Heck Geno even stated that he felt the Mizz AD should be held accountable for irresponsible statements of that nature.

Drop your attitude with me. I am a UCONN fan and if I like Dawn or do not like Dawn has nothing to do with this. What does are the facts. And the fact that you bring up, "Saying that an African American women promoted an atmosphere to have people spew racism and spitting on people is out of bounds" is also completely inappropriate in of it self because regardless of the gender or race of the individual I would hope no one would promote that atmosphere. Why do you need to mention her race and gender on this? You are entitled to your opinions as are we all. I stand by my statements and again question if it can be proved that the comments were made in an attempt to impugn her character or if the comments were made in reaction to what was occurring at the time. I think there is more to this story than the average fan knows.

 

[01Neaggrad02]

Did we sue Tennessee over their comments about Maya or were we unable to because they did it behind closed doors like cowards. Have to give the Mizz AD credit for doing it in public....
That being said... Anyone have the game on the internet for us to watch? I would love to see the crowd again. From what I remember seeing the crowd was very loud and non to pleasant. I will not say I agree with the assessment but I will not say it is without merit either.

 

[Sifaka]

There has been some fine legal discussion here. I suspect, however, that Dawn's suit was not brought with great concern about winning or losing the legal battles.
Why do I say that? FIrst, the monetary damages sought are nominal. Smart move. It forecloses rants about her presumably doing this for money. Next, her lawyers will have opportunities to force the AD to state in court that his "facts", if any, were hearsay.

As I see it—you folks will be quick to correct me if I'm wrong—she is seeking to put a spotlight on the issuer of unfounded insults. If she does that, she will have won this round.

As to whether or not the SC fans behaved badly, I don't know. I wasn't there.
But that is not the subject of the suit. Remember, it hinges on whether or not
Dawn Staley promoted ugly behavior by the fans.

 

[CL82]

Perhaps because she didn't directly accuse another coach of promoting an atmosphere of racism?

 

[j66kicker]

I also think that the amount she is seeking in this frivolous lawsuit just seems like a weird amount. Is there a cap on this type of (frivolous) lawsuit in SC?
Cause like my pappy use to say, "go big or go home!".

I know, right? Seems like if she really had a case she should go for $75 million, not $75,000.

 

[BigBird]

The first test of “actual malice” (uttering falsely and knowing it to be false at the time) is such a tall test that it is met in comparatively few circumstances. The second test, “reckless disregard for truth” is also a very tall order (as it should be when the plaintiff is a public figure). If the defendant made his summary judgments (about the “atmosphere” and that Dawn promoted it) without ANY reasonable facts or even personal experiences or observations, Dawn has a shot. Otherwise, this suit is a waste of the court’s time. Further, to collect any damages, she must show that the AD’s remarks actually caused demonstrable harm to her. Defense council is likely to argue that this bit of legal theater has actually HELPED Dawn and SC by arousing and rallying the SC fanbase and cementing further Dawn’s “fighter” image. No damage equals no case.

I should add that defamation law is a matter for each state to determine, according to its own laws and procedures. Most states are very similar in this regard, but exceptions exist. For example, in most states, truth is an ultimate defense. But in Louisiana it is not.

And...defamation is the broad classification. It has two sub-types, libel and slander. Typically, libel is published (in some fixed or far-reaching form), while slander is typically spoken and/or ad libbed. Of the two, libel is considered the more severe act, as the potential for damage is greater (because the words don’t immediately evaporate as they are said). For this reason, in most states, a broadcast of defamatory remarks is classified as libel.

This is a good thread. Many interesting and thoughtful posts.

 

[Bigboote]

If one has a kid who reads lips, could one sue a basketball coach because of the child-inappropriate language she's obviously shouting during a television broadcast? Or the broadcaster since they know there will be a nonstop stream and they show her anyway?

 

[01Neaggrad02]

The first test of “actual malice” (uttering falsely and knowing it to be false at the time) is such a tall test that it is met in comparatively few circumstances. The second test, “reckless disregard for truth” is also a very tall order (as it should be when the plaintiff is a public figure). If the defendant made his summary judgments (about the “atmosphere” and that Dawn promoted it) without ANY reasonable facts or even personal experiences or observations, Dawn has a shot. Otherwise, this suit is a waste of the court’s time. Further, to collect any damages, she must show that the AD’s remarks actually caused demonstrable harm to her. Defense council is likely to argue that this bit of legal theater has actually HELPED Dawn and SC by arousing and rallying the SC fanbase and cementing further Dawn’s “fighter” image. No damage equals no case.

I should add that defamation law is a matter for each state to determine, according to its own laws and procedures. Most states are very similar in this regard, but exceptions exist. For example, in most states, truth is an ultimate defense. But in Louisiana it is not.

And...defamation is the broad classification. It has two sub-types, libel and slander. Typically, libel is published (in some fixed or far-reaching form), while slander is typically spoken and/or ad libbed. Of the two, libel is considered the more severe act, as the potential for damage is greater (because the words don’t immediately evaporate as they are said). For this reason, in most states, a broadcast of defamatory remarks is classified as libel.

This is a good thread. Many interesting and thoughtful posts.

I like how you explained it. It was what I was going for, but your post is much more eloquent

 

[BigBird]

If one has a kid who reads lips, could one sue a basketball coach because of the child-inappropriate language she's obviously shouting during a television broadcast? Or the broadcaster since they know there will be a nonstop stream and they show her anyway?

Could you sue? Yes. Could you win such a case? Probably not. In civil courts, one can sue for anything, albeit only briefly.

While the FCC prohibits lewd, indecent, or profane language, these prohibitions only apply to over-air broadcast media. This regulation is supported by federal law (title 18 USC section 1464). Other electronic media must be (at least somewhat) concerned with other bodies of law and prosecutions.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

There has been some fine legal discussion here. I suspect, however, that Dawn's suit was not brought with great concern about winning or losing the legal battles.
Why do I say that? FIrst, the monetary damages sought are nominal. Smart move. It forecloses rants about her presumably doing this for money. Next, her lawyers will have opportunities to force the AD to state in court that his "facts", if any, were hearsay.

As I see it—you folks will be quick to correct me if I'm wrong—she is seeking to put a spotlight on the issuer of unfounded insults. If she does that, she will have won this round.

As to whether or not the SC fans behaved badly, I don't know. I wasn't there.
But that is not the subject of the suit. Remember, it hinges on whether or not
Dawn Staley promoted ugly behavior by the fans.

The crowd definitely had an edge that day and was very, very vocal. That was very unusual because of the average age of WBB fans. The edgy atmosphere, however, was not because of Dawn, but because of clips distributed by fans from the first game at Mizzou where there were many instances of extracurricular activity. If you compare to FB and MBB, though, it would have been typical of a game against a top rival.

 

[PhillyCoach]

I don't have a definitive answer to this, but, could one say that the Head Coach has the ultimate power and control of the crowd?
The coach could either encourage the wild atmosphere, discourage it, or not discourage it. I have seen all three.
There have been many coaches who grabbed the mic and controlled the crowd.
Coming from North Philly, Dawn has an edge because you need an edge. For some it is difficult to move out of that space. In addition, Dawn's key mentor was John Chaney. Chaney was as hard-nosed as any coach in America. He was a street fighter until the very end. Dawn is not a Southern California girl.
I can see where there are many viewpoints on this one.

 

[CL82]

If one has a kid who reads lips, could one sue a basketball coach because of the child-inappropriate language she's obviously shouting during a television broadcast? Or the broadcaster since they know there will be a nonstop stream and they show her anyway?

So this reminds of a well know Jim Calhoun story. Early on in his tenure at UConn the AD (John Toner, I believe) comes into Calhoun's office to tell him that some of his players parents, who were seated behind the UConn bench, were offended by his language. Much to Toner's surprise Calhoun offers no objection and tells him that he understands and will take care of it. Toner, grateful that the awkward conversation went so well, thanked him and left.

The next game the parents were seated on the opposite side of the arena.

 

[JellyBean]

Good Lord. Come on, Dawn.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I know, right? Seems like if she really had a case she should go for $75 million, not $75,000.

If she asked for more than $75,000, the case would be subject to be removed to Federal Court, where a federal judge would be about ten times more likely to dismiss her case as a state court judge would be.

This whole thing has been so painful. What was, I thought, a sort of fun rivalry is really descending into pettiness.

The AD should have issued a statement clarifying what I think is pretty obvious -- he didn't intend to suggest that Dawn Staley had encouraged the fans to make racial slurs or spit on players and he of course apologizes for any insinuation that she did. But no, everyone's dander was up so he had to be pigheaded about it.

I think USC should have left it with the SEC office. The lawsuit is way too much. I think it probably does more to damage Staley's reputation than the comments ever had any chance of doing.

Hopefully, the AD will take the sensible approach and issue the clarifying statement and this will be done. If not, I'm sure there will be motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and probably one at some point aimed at testing the sufficiency of the pleadings. What a colossal waste of time, IMO.

That said, I'll happily watch a rematch.

 

[HuskyNan]

If she asked for more than $75,000, the case would be subject to be removed to Federal Court, where a federal judge would be about ten times as likely to dismiss her case as a state court judge.

This whole thing has been so painful. What was, I thought, a sort of fun rivalry is really descending into pettiness.

The AD should have issued a statement clarifying what I think is pretty obvious -- he didn't intend to suggest that Dawn Staley had encouraged the fans to make racial slurs or spit on players and he of course apologizes for any insinuation that she did. But no, everyone's dander was up so he had to be pigheaded about it.

I think USC should have left it with the SEC office. The lawsuit is way too much. I think it probably does more to damage Staley's reputation than the comments ever had any chance of doing.

Hopefully, the AD will take the sensible approach and issue the clarifying statement and this will be done. If not, I'm sure there will be motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and probably one at some point aimed at testing the sufficiency of the pleadings. What a colossal waste of time, IMO.

That said, I'll happily watch a rematch.

The situation reminds me of Cappiegate, except Geno didn’t sue. It was still pretty ugly and I don’t believe Geno ever got a public apology. I do believe he got a private one, though

Big East commish clears Auriemma

 

[sharris952]

The situation reminds me of Cappiegate, except Geno didn’t sue. It was still pretty ugly and I don’t believe Geno ever got a public apology. I do believe he got a private one, though

Big East commish clears Auriemma

The problem is that the lawsuit is more about principal than anything thus the meager $75,000. As stated in the lawsuit all Dawn wanted was a retraction and/or apology for an unfounded accusation. If the Mizz could prove it, his arrogance would not have let him sit on said proof. Obviously, he was given a chance by the SEC commissioner and did not hence the $25,000 fine. I am African American and words and accusations like these normally come to often and go unpunished which cuts a little deeper especially when it involves this particular racial epithet and spitting which is the lowest form of degradation possible imo. This accusation was reported on the ESPN crawler, USA today, Washington Post, and in New York Times. I am sorry that Dawn will not just move on but frankly, I don't think she should. As I stated, what he said about an African American woman whose team in majority African American cuts deep and unless you have been where she has been and built your life around her service to country and the game of basketball, you cannot relate. No she will not just go away and shut up. If nothing else, the judge or proceedings will at least establish no proof of his insane accusations that I feel were meant to endure himself to his fanbase, yet in a very foolish and irresponsible way.

 

[HuskyNan]

The problem is that the lawsuit is more about principal than anything thus the meager $75,000. As stated in the lawsuit all Dawn wanted was a retraction and/or apology for an unfounded accusation. If the Mizz could prove it, his arrogance would not have let him sit on said proof. Obviously, he was given a chance by the SEC commissioner and did not hence the $25,000 fine. I am African American and words and accusations like these normally come to often and go unpunished which cuts a little deeper especially when it involves this particular racial epithet and spitting which is the lowest form of degradation possible imo. This accusation was reported on the ESPN crawler, USA today, Washington Post, and in New York Times. I am sorry that Dawn will not just move on but frankly, I don't think she should. As I stated, what he said about an African American woman whose team in majority African American cuts deep and unless you have been where she has been and built your life around her service to country and the game of basketball, you cannot relate. No she will not just go away and shut up. If nothing else, the judge or proceedings will at least establish no proof of his insane accusations that I feel were meant to endure himself to his fanbase, yet in a very foolish and irresponsible way.

Win or lose, Dawn isn't going to get what she wants and she might, in fact, make things worse. You can't bully, legislate, or preach someone into tolerance or respect. This lawsuit may be one of principal for Dawn, but to everyone but South Carolina fans she looks petty and petulant.

 

[HopJim]

Win or lose, Dawn isn't going to get what she wants and she might, in fact, make things worse. You can't bully, legislate, or preach someone into tolerance or respect. This lawsuit may be one on principal for Dawn, but to everyone but South Carolina fans she looks petty and petulant.

Everyone is losing on this one.