Tom Brady, other sports figures caught in the crypto scandal

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am surprised Mr. Wonderful is involved with this. I thought he was smart.

[packs]

He's rich so I assume he too enjoys doing nothing and getting paid.

[G1911]

More seriously, I can't see this suit going anywhere against the athletes. I don't believe they can be found liable for endorsing a product sponsor they had no real reason to think had some fraud involved. This seems like a "sue anyone with money" kind of suit that won't go anywhere.

I am not a lawyer, or smart.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

More seriously, I can't see this suit going anywhere against the athletes. I don't believe they can be found liable for endorsing a product sponsor they had no real reason to think had some fraud involved. This seems like a "sue anyone with money" kind of suit that won't go anywhere.

I am not a lawyer, or smart.

I am one of those two, and that was my initial reaction as well, although I'll keep an open mind until I read the Complaint. One suspects these folks were taken in as well. Shades of Madoff.

[packs]

It's common place to sue anyone and everyone involved in whatever issue it is that's in dispute. It doesn't necessarily mean anyone is really going after the athletes.

For example, if someone rear ends someone else and they claim they have a neck injury, they'll sue the manufacturer of the car, the ambulance service that showed up at the scene, the hospital where they were treated, etc. just to cast as wide a net as possible while looking to assign blame. Part of the strategy involves keeping your options for a pay day open and part of it is in hope that any one of the entities might settle with you just to settle even if they wouldn't be found liable at trial.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by packs

It's common place to sue anyone and everyone involved in whatever issue it is that's in dispute. It doesn't necessarily mean anyone is really going after the athletes.

For example, if someone rear ends someone else and they claim they have a neck injury, they'll sue the manufacturer of the car, the ambulance service that showed up at the scene, the hospital where they were treated, etc. just to cast as wide a net as possible while looking to assign blame. Part of the strategy involves keeping your options for a pay day open and part of it is in hope that any one of the entities might settle with you just to settle even if they wouldn't be found liable at trial.

If you name someone as a defendant, and presumably serve process on them, in what sense are you not going after them?

[packs]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If you name someone as a defendant, and presumably serve process on them, in what sense are you not going after them?

Like I said, it is often in the hope of a settlement. Not every suit is filed with the intention of going to trial.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

Like I said, it is often in the hope of a settlement. Not every suit is filed with the intention of going to trial.

Trying to score a payday from a settlement is going after them, and hoping it resolves quicker.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I am one of those two, and that was my initial reaction as well, although I'll keep an open mind until I read the Complaint. One suspects these folks were taken in as well. Shades of Madoff.

I will buy front row tickets if evidence is found that all these famous athletes knew and were actively involved in the fraud scheme of the year. Sometimes I really wish we could, as a society, clamp down on frivolous suits. Half the cases I read about, most of the time I get hauled in for jury duty (I swear the horrific video they show jurors about jury duty has not been updated since 1987), it seems readily apparent that it is frivolous and just someone trying to get rich off someone else without any reasonable cause.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I will buy front row tickets if evidence is found that all these famous athletes knew and were actively involved in the fraud scheme of the year. Sometimes I really wish we could, as a society, clamp down on frivolous suits. Half the cases I read about, most of the time I get hauled in for jury duty (I swear the horrific video they show jurors about jury duty has not been updated since 1987), it seems readily apparent that it is frivolous and just someone trying to get rich off someone else without any reasonable cause.

I actually think very few civil suits are like that, but they tend to get more publicity. The vast majority are routine.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I actually think very few civil suits are like that, but they tend to get more publicity. The vast majority are routine.

I may have bad luck. Every time I have to go in, it's some "how is this a case?" suit. The good thing is that makes it really easy to make sure I don't get selected

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I may have bad luck. Every time I have to go in, it's some "how is this a case?" suit. The good thing is that makes it really easy to make sure I don't get selected

In part what you're seeing is that most cases settle before trial, the vast majority really, so a jury is seeing cases that defendants refuse to settle and a higher percentage of those may be borderline.