Tom Brady, other sports figures caught in the crypto scandal

[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.

[packs]

Originally Posted by G1911

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

I guess my word choice was poor. I will amend it to "intend to go through with suing the athlete if no settlement is offered."