Dawn Taking It To Court...Literally

[Legendary Cock]

Won't accomplish anything.

She's gonna lose.

Not because she's wrong, but because she can't show monetary damages.

I think she'll settle for a public apology. She's only suing for $75000. So it kind of forces Sterk the Jerk's hand. He'll either have to fork over money to defend himself, settle for a little less and basically admit guilt in the public's eye, or just retract his statement and publicly apologize -- which I think is all Dawn wants. I'm no lawyer, but it seems kind of ingenious to me!

 

[Horseshoe 04]

I think she'll settle for a public apology. She's only suing for $75000. So it kind of forces Sterk the Jerk's hand. He'll either have to fork over money to defend himself, settle for a little less and basically admit guilt in the public's eye, or just retract his statement and publicly apologize -- which I think is all Dawn wants. I'm no lawyer, but it seems kind of ingenious to me!

Dawn is brilliant!

 

[raycock2001]

If Stankey had the guts this situation could have already been settled. Dawn was forced to defend herself because Tanner and the Stanke wouldn't. Sad very Sad the lack of backbone shown in this situation on both of their part. Until now an apology would have ended it but now I hope she will bust his sorry a$$.

Tanner? Really? There are right way's and wrong way's to handle things. Tell me exactly? What should Tanner have done, other than what he did?

 

[pettyw]

Tanner? Really? There are right way's and wrong way's to handle things. Tell me exactly? What should Tanner have done, other than what he did?

Stand up for Staley and defend her character. He only talked about investigating the accusations and never spoke about the things said about Staley.

 

[Rod Dangerfield]

I feel like I'd have better than average shot at passing the BAR after reading all 124 posts in this thread.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

Stand up for Staley and defend her character. He only talked about investigating the accusations and never spoke about the things said about Staley.

Actually he did. As has been pointed out MANY times.

 

[pettyw]

Actually he did. As has been pointed out MANY times.

You didn't hear the same interview I did apparently.

 

[pettyw]

I feel like I'd have better than average shot at passing the BAR after reading all 124 posts in this thread.

Which bar do you usually go to Schloskys. I wouldn't think you have ever passed a bar. lol

 

[USCBatgirl21]

You didn't hear the same interview I did apparently.

“I don’t want to speak to anything that Jim Sterk said. All I can tell is that we have a tremendous environment for women’s basketball in Colonial Life Arena. What Coach Staley and her players have built over the years here culminated in a national championship. We’ve won a lot of games. It’s a great enviroment for young women, it’s a great environment for women’s basketball,” Tanner said.

“So I think that it’s obvious that we would disagree with some of the comments that were made about our environment, and maybe some comments that were directed at Coach Staley are beyond understanding for me. It goes without saying what she has done. ... So comments that were made, we don’t understand that and only Jim Sterk can explain his reasoning.”

http://www.thestate.com/sports/coll...a/usc-womens-basketball/article197627524.html

Don't know how many times people have to post this very article over the last few weeks, but here it is again.

 

[Johnnie Cockran]

I think she'll settle for a public apology. She's only suing for $75000. So it kind of forces Sterk the Jerk's hand. He'll either have to fork over money to defend himself, settle for a little less and basically admit guilt in the public's eye, or just retract his statement and publicly apologize -- which I think is all Dawn wants. I'm no lawyer, but it seems kind of ingenious to me!

The $75,000 figure isn't coincidental. It is the limit to keep the case out of federal court, and makes litigation a giant pain in the a$$ for Mizzou's AD. Get 'em Dawn!

 

[gamecock1999]

“I don’t want to speak to anything that Jim Sterk said. All I can tell is that we have a tremendous environment for women’s basketball in Colonial Life Arena. What Coach Staley and her players have built over the years here culminated in a national championship. We’ve won a lot of games. It’s a great enviroment for young women, it’s a great environment for women’s basketball,” Tanner said.

“So I think that it’s obvious that we would disagree with some of the comments that were made about our environment, and maybe some comments that were directed at Coach Staley are beyond understanding for me. It goes without saying what she has done. ... So comments that were made, we don’t understand that and only Jim Sterk can explain his reasoning.”

http://www.thestate.com/sports/coll...a/usc-womens-basketball/article197627524.html

Don't know how many times people have to post this very article over the last few weeks, but here it is again.

That is a lukewarm response at best. He specifically says he's not addressing Sterk's comments about Dawn. All he said was Dawn has done a great job and won a championship. Well, duh, no kidding.

But Dawn deserved to have someone make Sterk apologize. If USC and SEC wouldn't do it, I'm glad she took it up herself. That woman is a fighter through and through. We're lucky to have her.

 

[92Pony]

That is a lukewarm response at best. He specifically says he's not addressing Sterk's comments about Dawn. All he said was Dawn has done a great job and won a championship. Well, duh, no kidding.

But Dawn deserved to have someone make Sterk apologize. If USC and SEC wouldn't do it, I'm glad she took it up herself. That woman is a fighter through and through. We're lucky to have her.

I agree!

I hadn't seen Tanner's statement(s) just above. That's nice and all, but I would have liked to have seen a little more fire and defense, kinda like when Jackleg accused him of cheating (bat warmers). You could hear it in his voice then - he was TICKED, and rightfully so. He knew he did things the right way, and DID NOT appreciate any assertion to the contrary. Same for CDS, and I would have liked to have seen that same spirit in defense of her. But anyway........

 

[USCBatgirl21]

I agree!

I hadn't seen Tanner's statement(s) just above. That's nice and all, but I would have liked to have seen a little more fire and defense, kinda like when Jackleg accused him of cheating (bat warmers). You could hear it in his voice then - he was TICKED, and rightfully so. He knew he did things the right way, and DID NOT appreciate any assertion to the contrary. Same for CDS, and I would have liked to have seen that same spirit in defense of her. But anyway........

Yes, but that was after YEARS of instances between them. A first instance, such as this, CRT handles privately. Y'all know this.

 

[coolcock2001]

The fact is many of y'all would be fired day 1 if you had RT's job

 

[92Pony]

Yes, but that was after YEARS of instances between them. A first instance, such as this, CRT handles privately. Y'all know this.

I wanna see some bruises on Stankey's shins or something then.

 

[Rod Dangerfield]

Which bar do you usually go to Schloskys. I wouldn't think you have ever passed a bar. lol

I'll tell you what, ole buddy....you find out which Schlotsky's has a bar, I'll happily meet you there & the first round will be on me.

 

[Angel_Martin]

Stand up for Staley and defend her character. He only talked about investigating the accusations and never spoke about the things said about Staley.

Well if Tanner knew that Staley was considering a law suit he was probably advised that discussing the issue in public as little as possible would be the best thing for Staley's case. He had to address the crowd allegations, but its better to lay low and build your legal case behind closed doors.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

Well if Tanner knew that Staley was considering a law suit he was probably advised that discussing the issue in public as little as possible would be the best thing for Staley's case. He had to address the crowd allegations, but its better to lay low and build your legal case behind closed doors.

Very well stated. Sterk basically hung himself with his public comments.

Makes you wonder if we gave them a time limit to act (Sterk and the SEC), they did notthing thinking we'd do nothing, and we called their bluff. Because it sure looks that way given the rapid response yesterday.

 

[pettyw]

I'll tell you what, ole buddy....you find out which Schlotsky's has a bar, I'll happily meet you there & the first round will be on me.

If they don't have a bar then im glad I lost the contest.

 

[pettyw]

Well if Tanner knew that Staley was considering a law suit he was probably advised that discussing the issue in public as little as possible would be the best thing for Staley's case. He had to address the crowd allegations, but its better to lay low and build your legal case behind closed doors.

I didn't want a legal case. That might take years before it is heard in court. I was hoping something would be done while the issue is still fresh on everyone's (recruits and their parents) mind.

 

[Rod Dangerfield]

If they don't have a bar then im glad I lost the contest.

Oh, you didn't lose it! It was a gosh dang conspiracy against you.

 

[coolcock2001]

Why doesn't Ray Tanner just beat his ass?????

 

[pettyw]

Oh, you didn't lose it! It was a gosh dang conspiracy against you.

No doubt but lets meet one day and I buy first round then we go to sholskys

 

[cocky4]

The problem with lawyers is that they think the only reality or outcome that matters is the outcome of the courts system. I am quite sure Dawn Staley does not give a rats behind what she can get a court to reward her. She is simply trying to defend herself and reputation...and this suit is a last resort.

With everything that has happened at Mizzou I am sure Ray could hhave found a nice big target to attack. Make it a nasty little mess that forced the SEC to act..instead he wanted to try to be nice and let his coach be slandered in public. I wonder if he would have acted the same way if it was his wife that was accused of those things? If so...I feel sorry for his wife. Most probably he would have been ready to take it out in the street if need be....which is how he should have acted on behalf of Dawn.

 

[The Coup Nazi]

I don't think ill be hiring you. Ive been in law enforcement for 42 years so I know a little bit about it. Im in the court house as we speak as a matter of fact.

Help me understand. Except for the service of papers, how is law enforcement in any way related to a civil suit?

 

[FORKCOCK]

I'm eating all this up with a spoon. I haven't seen this much off-the-court intrigue and animus since the ACC days. I just wish we could have a similar scenario with another SEC school we play every year centering around either football or men's basketball. I don't care which one it is, either. That would be perfect. I hope the hatred intensifies.

I'm in sales King.

My mentor always to me to get out there and create hate and discontent.

 

[pettyw]

Help me understand. Except for the service of papers, how is law enforcement in any way related to a civil suit?

I work in civil court now. Retired from road work

 

[rogue cock]

One of the elements that a plaintiff must prove in a slander/libel case is "special damages."

"Special damages" means pecuniary loss.

Dawn can't prove any pecuniary loss; therefore. she will lose.

They could find for her and give her pecuniary damages of $0. Her problem is that she would be considered a public figure, so she would have to prove not only that the statements were false, but that he knew they were false when he made them. That's a tough one to prove.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

They could find for her and give her pecuniary damages of $0. Her problem is that she would be considered a public figure, so she would have to prove not only that the statements were false, but that he knew they were false when he made them. That's a tough one to prove.

In today's age where there is a video of EVERYTHING happening on the planet, maybe not so difficult.

 

[rogue cock]

Bunch of experts ITT

That's true. I doubt anyone has ever seen, much less handled a libel/slander suit. My only source is from law school and the case of Sullivan v. New York Times.

 

[pettyw]

Dawn Staley is a well respected coach and person. She coaches at a university that has a nationally respected law school. She has personal access to some of the best professors and lawyers in the nation. They must have given her the wrong advise.

 

[coolcock2001]

Dawn Staley is a well respected coach and person. She coaches at a university that has a nationally respected law school. She has personal access to some of the best professors and lawyers in the nation. They must have given her the wrong advise.

Alternatively, perhaps her advice/information is better than the collective wisdom of FGF.

 

[92Pony]

Alternatively, perhaps her advice/information is better than the collective wisdom of FGF.

Simply not possible!

 

[BattleshipTexas]

They could find for her and give her pecuniary damages of $0. Her problem is that she would be considered a public figure, so she would have to prove not only that the statements were false, but that he knew they were false when he made them. That's a tough one to prove.

While true, maybe all she wants to do is take his deposition and watch him squirm when he is asked how he knew she was behind the spitting. Her lawyer, if even average good, can make the guy's life miserable for three hours. And make him look ridiculous. I guess he did that all by himself, but display his ridiculousness to the world. Any damages are just gravy.

 

[BattleshipTexas]

That's true. I doubt anyone has ever seen, much less handled a libel/slander suit. My only source is from law school and the case of Sullivan v. New York Times.

Counting up, I think I have been involved in five libel/slander/defamation cases for a client. Now none of mine were public figures like Dawn, so Sullivan did not apply. All of mine were just a part of some broader underlying disagreement. Two partners who break up a business and claim all sorts of things about the other. A high ranking employee of a company fired, he believes unjustly and lots of litigation ensues. None of my cases ever even came close to going to trial. The overall settlement of the breakup or whatever happens, as both sides tire of paying lawyers (no one ever takes those cases on contingency). Just one arrow in the quiver you fire at a litigation opponent. Sort of like usury. Just always throw a usury complaint into any complicated financial litigation.

 

[vacock#]

He can claim he saw it and who can prove otherwise?

What he can’t do is prove that Coach Staley encouraged it!

 

[coolcock2001]

He can claim he saw it and who can prove otherwise?

What he can’t do is prove that Coach Staley encouraged it!

It's a little more complicated than just claiming whatever he wants...

"Now I ask you again Mr. Sterk, and I remind you that you are under oath and penalty of perjury. Did you or did you not witness the spitting with your own two eyes?"