Rich: More lawyers weigh in

[pap49cba]

LINK

 

[Kibitzer]

Why am I not surprised to read that Hardwick's attorney stated that he is "willing to have a conversation" (with attorneys for the defendants). It goes without saying that both parties are open for some discussion or negotiation to settle. But since it "goes without saying," why did he make it his business to say it? Publicly, at that.

 

[UCONNfan1]

That was a very good explanation. A few things stand out...

1. It's nearly impossible to prove a "he said, she said" accusation with absolutely no proof from 3 years ago
2. If there is no proof, and she didn't pursue anything in 2009 when it occurred, AND Geno had nothing to do with her NOT getting the gig in London, then it seems to me there is no case and it should be dismissed.

If nothing else, if it can't be proven that Geno had ANYTHING to do with her being reassigned, or not getting the Olympic job, then it seems she has no case.

Now if she can provide some video of the incident, or if other women come forward with accusations, or Geno DID tell the NBA officials he did not want her on the Olympic detail, there seems at the very least, enough for the suit to move forward.

In my perfect world, there is a video of the elevator ride exonerating Geno.

In the absence of that, I hope he had zero to do with her not getting London. If that's the case, then how could he have any responsibility for her reassignment?

One last thing that seems to make little sense is that she provided security for the US national team in Hartford, Spain, and the Czech republic since the alleged 2009 incident. Wouldn't Geno have asked to have her removed from those assignments if he had an issue with her?

One thing in her favor is if she can prove she's the most senior person and was somehow entitled to the job. It does seem odd that she was on the detail for the 2004 and 2008 Olympics, and also the US national team in Hartford, Spain, and Czech Republic, only to be reassigned for the 2012 Olympics.

 

[Chloe]

One last thing that seems to make little sense is that she provided security for the US national team in Hartford, Spain, and the Czech republic since the alleged 2009 incident. Wouldn't Geno have asked to have her removed from those assignments if he had an issue with her?

This is one of the things I don't understand. Why wouldn't he have taken her off the security team during one of those competitions if he was "embarrassed" as her lawyers say? Wouldn't he have wanted to get rid of her as soon as possible and not wait 3 years to do so? It all seems so strange, and she is still working. It is not as if she lost her job she just doesn't like her new assignment.

 

[HuskyNan]

In my perfect world, there is a video of the elevator ride exonerating Geno.

I've seen a few people referring to the possibility of a hotel security tape that might provide info for the case. My understanding of security videos is that they are run on a loop and that the tapes will record events for a specified period of time, a day, a week a month or whatever, then is recorded over. The possibility that a hotel - one in Russia, yet - might be able to provide a security tape from 2009 is about zero.

Not responding directly to you, UCONNfan1, just making a general comment.

 

[MilfordHusky]

We have so many lawyers and others weighing in that it looks like a Weight Watchers meeting!

 

[Kibitzer]

I've seen a few people referring to the possibility of a hotel security tape that might provide info for the case. My understanding of security videos is that they are run on a loop and that the tapes will record events for a specified period of time, a day, a week a month or whatever, then is recorded over. The possibility that a hotel - one in Russia, yet - might be able to provide a security tape from 2009 is about zero.

Not responding directly to you, UCONNfan1, just making a general comment.

Seems to me that Ms. Hardwick, being a security professional and all, would likely be aware of this. If so, she may have waited too long to officially report the alleged incident with Geno.

Of course we all know that in 2009 Geno was not the designated coach of the Olympic team on the eve of that major world sports event. Far be it for me to suggest that this had anything to do with the timing of the filing of her law suit.

(Believe that and I'll tell you another.)

 

[UcMiami]

I've seen a few people referring to the possibility of a hotel security tape that might provide info for the case. My understanding of security videos is that they are run on a loop and that the tapes will record events for a specified period of time, a day, a week a month or whatever, then is recorded over. The possibility that a hotel - one in Russia, yet - might be able to provide a security tape from 2009 is about zero.

Not responding directly to you, UCONNfan1, just making a general comment.

I have been think the same thing every time someone mentions 'video', but too lazy to post. Some high security places will archive all their footage, some places will not use a 'loop' and will save individual tapes for a certain period (usually 1 month - 1 year range.) But for any hotel to bother saving video for 3 years would be unlikely. The video is there for theft or other crimes that would be reported within 24 hours and not 3 years later. And one does suspect that Russia might be a little more lax than other places.

 

[speedoo]

So basically, according to Rich's sources, plaintiff's case is extremely weak.

Anyone who follows women's basketball and knowing that the Olympics are a few months away, should be able to see that this case is all about the plaintiff looking for a quick settlement.

So do any of the defendants want a quick settlement?

Based on what we know, Geno would certainly not.

And the NBA and USA Basketball, assuming they see the case as very weak as well, are very unlikely to want a quick settlement either.

 

[JS]

And the NBA and USA Basketball, assuming they see the case as very weak as well, are very unlikely to want a quick settlement either.

And all the more unlikely if the proposed settlement involved not just money but an employee successfully getting her preferred assignment by the expedient of filing a lawsuit against the employer.

I'd guess that by the time the initial dispositive motions for dismissal/summary judgment are filed and decided that possibility will be moot, and then we'll see where the plaintiff is going with this litigation (assuming it survives the motions).

 

[Huskymaniac]

I will say this, she is very good at hiding all information about herself on the internet. I can't even find where she got her degrees from. All I could find is that she started a company with a guy named Al Mack called The Imac Group and that one of the guys working for her is another former narc investigator.

 

[Replicant]

I'd guess that by the time the initial dispositive motions for dismissal/summary judgment are filed and decided that possibility will be moot, and then we'll see where the plaintiff is going with this litigation (assuming it survives the motions).

That's my guess as well.

I realize that Randolph McLaughlin (Hardwick's lawyer) has a job to do. And seizing on Geno's celebrity as the fulcrum to leverage a settlement (Plan A) was a no brainer. They signaled it immediately using Geno's name as the representative Defendant, relegating Hardwick v. Auriemma to be referenced wherever this suit goes - even though this is all about getting a pound of flesh from the NBA.

That said, the cavalier and/or vindictive way in which McLaughlin and Hardwick are willing to trade away a good man's reputation for a handful of silver, is revolting. I pray Geno retains an option to countersue for defamation and doesn't permit it to be bargained away in a settlement.

 

[Papa33]

We have so many lawyers and others weighing in that it looks like a Weight Watchers meeting!

I've been reading along as various legal sources have been "weighing in," but when I saw that Rich Elliott featured an assessment from Joe Garrison, I took special notice. Joe has long been considered one of Connecticut's premier employment litigators— if not *the* best one. More, he is almost always the plaintiff's attorney— i.e., bringing suit against employers— in cases of wrongful discrimination or discharge. I would be much more worried were he the lawyer pressing a suit against Geno. That Joe finds weaknesses in Hardwick's suit is, in the absence of hard facts, comforting. His analysis strongly suggest that from the standpoint of the legal principles, Geno is peripheral to the heart of her complaint, though he has been put at the center for reasons other than legal.

 

[Kibitzer]

The more I read of analysis and opinions by expert but disinterested legal minds, the more I am convinced that McLaughlin should have figured out some way to file his "Auriemma" law suit in Knoxville, Tennessee, then hope for a jury comprised of Summitteers.

 

[HuskyNan]

I've been reading along as various legal sources have been "weighing in," but when I saw that Rich Elliott featured an assessment from Joe Garrison, I took special notice. Joe has long been considered one of Connecticut's premier employment litigators— if not *the* best one.

His bio:

JOSEPH D. GARRISON
Garrison, Levin-Epstein, Chimes, Richardson & Fitzgerald, P.C., New Haven, CT

Joe is managing shareholder of Garrison, Levin-Epstein, where his practice focuses on employment rights. He served as President of the National Employment Lawyers Association (Advocates for Employment Rights) and a member of the Board of Directors of NELA for 15 years. Joe was a founding Governor, Charter Fellow and President of the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers. He presently serves on the Counsel for the Labor and Employment and Law Section of the American Bar Association and is its liason to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Joe is increasingly active as a mediator and arbitrator, and in 2009 was appointed to the American Arbitration Association’s Board of Directors.

 

[connboy77]

The more I read of analysis and opinions by expert but disinterested legal minds, the more I am convinced that McLaughlin should have figured out some way to file his "Auriemma" law suit in Knoxville, Tennessee, then hope for a jury comprised of Summitteers.

The Summitteers are not the brightest people in the world, thats for sure! There philosophy has always been guilty until proven innocent. They are a nasty bunch of orange posters.

 

[asuwish]

This is one of the things I don't understand. Why wouldn't he have taken her off the security team during one of those competitions if he was "embarrassed" as her lawyers say? Wouldn't he have wanted to get rid of her as soon as possible and not wait 3 years to do so? It all seems so strange, and she is still working. It is not as if she lost her job she just doesn't like her new assignment.

Why would she want to be around Geno, with the job of protecting him if she doesn't like him. She is still employed, but just not this assignment. No loss of wages, title, or anything else. Wouldn't she be happier guarding David Stern than the team. I said before Geno doesn't pick the players on the team, so why would USA basketball ask Geno his opinion about the security team. He would have had to go way out of his way to bring this up and make sure she wasn't there, and it is known that since 2009 he has not cared that she was around him.