Hey, legal beagles

[HuskyNan]

Let's assume that the lawyers for the defendants file a motion to dismiss and that the judge does dismiss the lawsuit. I personally think that would leave a nasty taste in Geno's mouth because I can imagine with no difficulty whatsoever that he wants his day in court. Would he have a case for filing a lawsuit against Ms. Hardwick in an attempt to clear his name? Is such a thing advisable?

This is assuming an awful lot of things we don't know, of course. We don't know what happened in Russia between Geno and Hardwick. We also don't know if Hardwick's suit is actually against the NBA but the law firm included Geno & USA Basketball for the publicity, as it probably didn't get the big splash in the press it wanted when it filed its first law suit against the deep-pocketed NBA. I don't want to ascribe any negative motives to Ms Hardwick, though I will plead guilty to throwing the law firm under the bus without any facts.

He saw a lawyer killing a viper on a dunghill hard by his own stable;
And the Devil smiled, for it put him in mind of Cain and his brother Abel.

-- Samuel Taylor Coleridge

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

Let's assume that the lawyers for the defendants file a motion to dismiss and that the judge does dismiss the lawsuit. I personally think that would leave a nasty taste in Geno's mouth because I can imagine with no difficulty whatsoever that he wants his day in court. Would he have a case for filing a lawsuit against Ms. Hardwick in an attempt to clear his name? Is such a thing advisable?

Generally, there is an absolute judicial privilege that applies to allegedly defamatory statements made in legal pleadings.

If, however, there was no basis for the lawsuit, whether jurisdictionally or based upon a failure of the attorney to conduct a pre-filing investigation of facts, then it is possible that a motion for sanctions may be brought under New York's version of Rule 11, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (assuming New York has a similar state law rule of civil procedure or statutory provision).

Federal Rule 11 provides that attorneys who sign their names to pleadings certify, based on "knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances," among other things:

(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law; and
(3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery;.

 

[speedoo]

I think I understand what that means Cam, but I would appreciate a translation for non-attorneys here.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

I think I understand what that means Cam, but I would appreciate a translation for non-attorneys here.

Basically, when an attorney attaches his name to a complaint, motion, etc., he is certifying that the factual allegations have some level of support and that the attorney conducted some investigation to make this determination. It also certifies that the legal claims are ones that are capable of being brought. It also means that there is a legitimate, legal purpose behind filing a complaint or a motion.

 

[speedoo]

Basically, when an attorney attaches his name to a complaint, motion, etc., he is certifying that the factual allegations have some level of support and that the attorney conducted some investigation to make this determination. It also certifies that the legal claims are ones that are capable of being brought. It also means that there is a legitimate, legal purpose behind filing a complaint or a motion.

So I guess that means plaintiff's attorneys could be sanctioned if it is determined that there is no legitimate, legal purpose behind the claim. What about the plaintiff, herself?. Does Geno have to sue for defamation to gain some satisfaction with regard to her? And repeating Nan's question, is that advisable?

 

[Wonkster]

Hey, legal beagles

Sounds like you're summoning The Hounds of Basketville.

 

[FairView]

But what about Nan's question regarding Geno filing a suit against Ms. Hardwick?
Does this "Generally, there is an absolute judicial privilege that applies to allegedly defamatory statements made in legal pleadings." mean no?

 

[Icebear]

Cam, how do hardwick's reports to her supervisor fit under heresay law?

 

[ed4ourgirls]

If the suit against Geno is dismissed, I believe it would be unwise
to pursue a countersuit unless he could prove that Ms. Hardwick's
account of what happened in Russia is completely false (and how
could he do that?).

A countersuit keeps the allegations in the public eye, and gives the
defendant an opportunity to try to sling more mud around.

If the suit against Geno is dismissed, just make a very public
pronouncement that Geno has been vindicated, and let it go
at that.

 

[TRest]

I would assume the stakes are high enough, and the plaintiff's attorney competent enough, to not risk a motion to dismiss for jurisdictional reasons.

 

[speedoo]

I would assume the stakes are high enough, and the plaintiff's attorney competent enough, to not risk a motion to dismiss for jurisdictional reasons.

What's the risk?

 

[JS]

I would assume the stakes are high enough, and the plaintiff's attorney competent enough, to not risk a motion to dismiss for jurisdictional reasons.

He may have had to take the risk. He couldn't have everything he wanted. If he didn't want a jurisdictional challenge, he could've gone the federal route and gone through time-consuming federal agency proceedings against the corporate defendants as a necessary prerequisite to suing them in federal district court.

He chose instead (no doubt with an eye to the impending Olympics) to get his lawsuit filed right away. He could do that, according to him, by filing in the New York State court.

But that carries the risk of a jurisdictional challenge in Geno's case, because he neither lives nor works in New York. So the solution, according to the attorney, is to use New York's "long arm" statute.

Under such a statute (common in other states as well), people and businesses domiciled elsewhere can be hailed into New York court if they do certain things in that State. It is especially used to sue companies that, even though they don't have a location within the State, have sufficient contacts with the State and activities within its borders to meet the requirements of the statute.

I read the New York long-arm statute the other night and a little bit of case law. I'm not an expert on New York law, but that reading left me with the impression that most of the grounds for long arm jurisdiction would be inapplicable, and Geno would pretty much have had to have attended a meeting in New York at which he did whatever bad thing ("tortious act") the plaintiff is alleging. I don't think Geno sitting in Connecticut or elsewhere with someone from USA or the NBA on the other end of the line in New York would do it.

I'm not at all sure just what plaintiff's attorney is relying on or expects or hopes to rely on (after jurisdictional discovery) to survive a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds. (There will no doubt be a motion dismiss on other grounds as well, failing that most basic motion.) But it does seem to me that the facts would have to be very good for plaintiff, or plaintiff would have to draw a judge with a quite expansive view of the long arm statute, to get past the motion.

If there were a dismissal in the New York state court, plaintiff could always go to federal district court and file a tort suit against Geno separately on diversity of citizenship grounds, but I expect she'd think long and hard before expanding the field of battle on which to fight a case that appears to hold enough difficulties for her already.

 

[UCONNfan1]

Generally, there is an absolute judicial privilege that applies to allegedly defamatory statements made in legal pleadings..

Was that even English? You must be some kind of lawyer dude, cuz i felt like i was reading a foreign language...

 

[UCONNfan1]

Basically, when an attorney attaches his name to a complaint, motion, etc., he is certifying that the factual allegations have some level of support and that the attorney conducted some investigation to make this determination. It also certifies that the legal claims are ones that are capable of being brought. It also means that there is a legitimate, legal purpose behind filing a complaint or a motion.

Thanks for dumbing it down for us non legal-beagles!

 

[UcMiami]

As far as a countersuit - I would think it unlikely for above stated reasons.
As far as the case getting tossed on a number of fronts - I think it quite likely, and especially in terms of Geno as a defendant.

As far as her having a case related to not being assigned to the Olympics - as I undertsand it, this is not part of her job description and as long as her pay and position remain the same, being assiged one security duty vs. another is not grounds for a discrimation complaint. It's like an ad exec complaining he wasn't given the Coke account and instead got assigned to the Procter & Gamble account - same pay, different assignment. Maybe there was a personality conflict with someone from Coke, so what. An employer is not required to assign employees to the specific jobs they want and they can make those decisions on a wide latitude of factors - including one of their clients saying we would prefer someone else.

By the way - there was something in one of the articles about the attorney saying that NYS had a longer statute of limitations on the accusations against Geno and that being one of the reasons to file in NYS. But I think it does make the filing much flimsier.

 

[meyers7]

If the suit against Geno is dismissed, I believe it would be unwise
to pursue a countersuit unless he could prove that Ms. Hardwick's
account of what happened in Russia is completely false (and how
could he do that?).

A countersuit keeps the allegations in the public eye, and gives the
defendant an opportunity to try to sling more mud around.

If the suit against Geno is dismissed, just make a very public
pronouncement that Geno has been vindicated, and let it go
at that.

Agree completely. The sooner this is out of the public's eye, the better. Would never think about bringing it back.