Reply to Bad Art Friend

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Bad Art Friend"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]The short version of "Larson's not doing as well as that PP thinks" is that Larson had her two fundamental claims (intentional interference with two contracts) dismissed even after the court found that they were not well plead and read the contracts into the pleading to do her lawyer a favor.

Dorland's dismissed claims were IIED which anyone who's been to law school knows is not a winner and a claim against her lawyer for sending letters for an improper legal purpose, where the lawyer's only argument was that the letters were shielded by privilege and the court disagreed.

So if there should be celebration about dismissals (and that would be premature because other claims still stand and some can be replead) it would happen on Dorland's side, because the claims they got dismissed were vital to Larson's lawsuit.  But celebrating something like that or using it as a bellwether of the case is not something I'd expect to see from a lawyer.

Much more telling of "how it's going" is that Larson has been adamantly opposed to settlement discussions and now is pushing for the same.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics