Quote:
Originally posted by robustpuppy
He wants revenge, and I don't think it's because his feewing were huwt. Given how harshly a jury would likely view her, he has a chance, if he can get it past a judge. Of course, having conceded that everything she said is true may make that difficult.
|
I disagree again. I see this guy with a decent shot at getting a big fat zero. What are his damages? He didn't lose his job, did he?How likely is a DC jury to feel sympathy for a (presumably white) secret-spanking Republican lawyer in a fairly high-ranking position?
But I don't think it will get past a motion to dismiss. Granted, I don't know diddly about tort claims in DC, but he wouldn't have a shot at stating a valid claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress or invasion of privacy around here. There's some real bad case law with bizarro and really horrific fact patterns (bad as in people dying, not bad as in being outed as the one of five boyfriends who can't come with a condom) where those claims get booted as a matter of law.
If I were her lawyer, I'd counterclaim for sexual harassment. One of her bosses set her up with this guy who is her superior, she has a relationship with him, and then gets fired when it becomes public. That one will get past the motion to dismiss stage.
This dude is stupid. If he were in private practice, he would perhaps remember the reason why lawyers tend not to sue clients on unpaid legal bills . . .
