• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

wrongful termination

I tend to agree: the first tranche of documents submitted does seem poorly prepared.

However in all fairness to Ryan's legal team, I have been involved in cases in in this country where the original submission is comparatively light on legal references and some areas are not fully expanded until the next stage, presumably in order to try and draw out the opposition's position in a bit more detail.

In this respect one might argue that the motion to dismiss allows Ryan's lawyers to identify any areas of particularly stiff opposition and concentrate on others.

Then again, they could just be crap at unfair dismissal claims. But I've come across comparable situations before, and they inevitably wise-up prior to court proceedings.
 
LashL said:
I don't know enough about them (yet) to say whether they are acting on a contingency basis or not, but if I had to guess, I would guess that they are.
Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree. I don't do a lot of wrongful terminations but I do enough to know that the employee almost always loses. In fact, the employee almost always lies to me (or is self-deluded) about the reason for termination. For that reason alone, I never accept such a case on contingency.

A second reason is that damages are usually limited to the person's compensation - a few months' salary at most. Unlike personal injury, there are almost no million dollar awards lurking out there. So, there's not a lot of money to be made on the contingency gamble.

On the other hand, it's possible Ryan's lawyers got punked. He came to them with this astonishing story that they bought into (UL covering up work it did, firing employees to keep secrets, etc.) and now they've found that none of that is true. That's my guess as to why at least one and probably all of them are going to quit - they now see they are destined to lose and probably won't get paid by anyone.
 
~enigma~ said:
Some people mistakenly think Churchill was referring to Jane Austin but as Indiana here said, he was referring to Russia. The exact quote was..

"Russia is a mystery, wrapped in a secret, cloaked by an enigma."
Click to expand...
Reminds me of Woody Allen's line, which can be used to describe the Truthers:

"This trial is a travesty. It’s a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham."
 
Architect said:
I tend to agree: the first tranche of documents submitted does seem poorly prepared.

However in all fairness to Ryan's legal team, I have been involved in cases in in this country where the original submission is comparatively light on legal references and some areas are not fully expanded until the next stage, presumably in order to try and draw out the opposition's position in a bit more detail.

In this respect one might argue that the motion to dismiss allows Ryan's lawyers to identify any areas of particularly stiff opposition and concentrate on others.

Then again, they could just be crap at unfair dismissal claims. But I've come across comparable situations before, and they inevitably wise-up prior to court proceedings.
Click to expand...


Oh, yes, I have seen lots of badly drafted pleadings. In fact, I'm looking at two right this minute on my desk. I am bringing motions to strike out the claims against some of the named defendants for failure to state a cause of action, and to strike out several additional paragraphs of the claims against the remaining defendants as frivolous, vexatious and/or irrelevant.

Most likely, the court will grant my motions but also grant the plaintiffs leave to amend their claims, to plead them properly. I don't know if the procedure is similar in the U.S. but I'm sure LossLeader would know. The benefit to my clients in doing this is (a) to get certain defendants out of the action entirely; and (b) to force the plaintiffs to plead their claims properly so that the issues can be defined and then the claims defended.
 
Loss Leader said:
I'd have to disagree. I don't do a lot of wrongful terminations but I do enough to know that the employee almost always loses. In fact, the employee almost always lies to me (or is self-deluded) about the reason for termination. For that reason alone, I never accept such a case on contingency.

A second reason is that damages are usually limited to the person's compensation - a few months' salary at most. Unlike personal injury, there are almost no million dollar awards lurking out there. So, there's not a lot of money to be made on the contingency gamble.

On the other hand, it's possible Ryan's lawyers got punked. He came to them with this astonishing story that they bought into (UL covering up work it did, firing employees to keep secrets, etc.) and now they've found that none of that is true. That's my guess as to why at least one and probably all of them are going to quit - they now see they are destined to lose and probably won't get paid by anyone.
Click to expand...

You are quite right, of course, about wrongful dismissal cases not being worth much money and not usually being the subject of contingency fee arrangements. The reason that I guessed that there might be such an arrangement in this case is solely based on the woo factor of the claim.

But your punked scenario makes sense, too. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I'll keep an eye on the case at PACER to see if/when Ryan files a response to UL's motion to dismiss, and will get the docs up as soon as I see them :)
 
LashL said:
You are quite right, of course, about wrongful dismissal cases not being worth much money and not usually being the subject of contingency fee arrangements. The reason that I guessed that there might be such an arrangement in this case is solely based on the woo factor of the claim.

But your punked scenario makes sense, too. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I'll keep an eye on the case at PACER to see if/when Ryan files a response to UL's motion to dismiss, and will get the docs up as soon as I see them :)
Click to expand...
Send it over anytime and I'll quick as a bunny get it up on the web for you.
 
How long does the court usually give them to respond to the motion to dismiss?

If the plaintiffs don't respond, does that mean that the dismissal is done deal?
 
Spindrift said:
How long does the court usually give them to respond to the motion to dismiss?
Click to expand...

About a month. But that usually only results in a call from the clerk asking where the heck your papers are. After two months, the court will probably make a ruling without waiting for you anymore.

If the plaintiffs don't respond, does that mean that the dismissal is done deal?
Click to expand...

Usually but not necessarily. The court could still find that the movant has not substantiated its motion but, without oposing papers to point the court in the right direction, it is unlikely the judge would go looking for legal reasons to deny the motion. An obviously unjustified and unfounded motion to dismiss shouldn't be able to succeed even with no opposition.
 
In my experience one of the myths of TV is that court proceedings can be dismissed on minor technicalities such as missing an interim submission date or somesuch. Courts go out of their way to try and ensure that someone has every chance to be heard.
 
LashL said:
Oh, yes, I have seen lots of badly drafted pleadings. In fact, I'm looking at two right this minute on my desk. I am bringing motions to strike out the claims against some of the named defendants for failure to state a cause of action, and to strike out several additional paragraphs of the claims against the remaining defendants as frivolous, vexatious and/or irrelevant.

Most likely, the court will grant my motions but also grant the plaintiffs leave to amend their claims, to plead them properly. I don't know if the procedure is similar in the U.S. but I'm sure LossLeader would know. The benefit to my clients in doing this is (a) to get certain defendants out of the action entirely; and (b) to force the plaintiffs to plead their claims properly so that the issues can be defined and then the claims defended.
Click to expand...
I thought you just had to give the judge a secret handshake and a wink. Don't we have the courts in our pocket? :con2:
 
chipmunk stew said:
I thought you just had to give the judge a secret handshake and a wink. Don't we have the courts in our pocket? :con2:
Click to expand...

That will be evident as the case is dismissed, the media fail to cover it, the legal fees result in his bankruptcy, the banks reposses his house and no one will give him a job.

It's great having everyone in on it! :D
 
LashL said:
Most likely, the court will grant my motions but also grant the plaintiffs leave to amend their claims, to plead them properly. I don't know if the procedure is similar in the U.S. but I'm sure LossLeader would know.
Click to expand...

OK, fine. Bar exam time:

In New York, at least, the plaintiff can amend his complaint without permission of the court for thirty days after filing (even if a motion to dismiss has already been made). After that, the court's permission is needed but it is supposed to be granted on such terms as may be just (which is usually payment to the defendant for the cost of having to ask just what the heck your pleading is saying).

Whether a pleading is amended or not, the courts are all supposed to interpret the pleadings as generously as possible. They're really supposed to bend over backwards to figure out whether you make out a claim. I have heard of cases whether the courts have attempted to tease the legal underpinnings from words scrawled by a mentally ill plaintiff on a brown grocery bag.

That having been said, the court will not imagine facts for you. If you fail to plead facts sufficient to state a claim under law, the court will not let your cause of action stand. So, if I say, "I had a radio and LashL took it," the court will happily read a cause of action for conversion and let the thing stand. If I claim, "I had a radio and LashL owes me $400.00," I don't think the court is going to rescue me by supplying the missing fact (that LashL took it) and it will dismiss the claim.
 
Loss Leader said:
OK, fine. Bar exam time:

In New York, at least, the plaintiff can amend his complaint without permission of the court for thirty days after filing (even if a motion to dismiss has already been made). After that, the court's permission is needed but it is supposed to be granted on such terms as may be just (which is usually payment to the defendant for the cost of having to ask just what the heck your pleading is saying).

Whether a pleading is amended or not, the courts are all supposed to interpret the pleadings as generously as possible. They're really supposed to bend over backwards to figure out whether you make out a claim. I have heard of cases whether the courts have attempted to tease the legal underpinnings from words scrawled by a mentally ill plaintiff on a brown grocery bag.

That having been said, the court will not imagine facts for you. If you fail to plead facts sufficient to state a claim under law, the court will not let your cause of action stand. So, if I say, "I had a radio and LashL took it," the court will happily read a cause of action for conversion and let the thing stand. If I claim, "I had a radio and LashL owes me $400.00," I don't think the court is going to rescue me by supplying the missing fact (that LashL took it) and it will dismiss the claim.
Click to expand...

Thanks. It's slightly different here. Before pleadings are closed, a party can amend without consent and without leave unless the amendment includes the addition, deletion or substitution of a party. After pleadings are closed, a party requires either the consent of all other parties or the permission of the court.

It is similar, however, in that courts will almost always allow amendments "on such terms as are just" unless prejudice would result that could not be compensated by costs or an adjournment. The type of prejudice that would generally preclude the court allowing an amendment would be, for instance, the expiration of a limitation period that would otherwise operate as a complete bar to the cause of action sought to be added by the amendment. Otherwise, the court is likely to grant leave to amend and order costs payable to the other parties as well as further examination rights, adjournment, and other appropriate relief. But, here too, they will almost always allow the amendments to be made.

To everyone else: for the record, I didn't take LossLeader's radio, honest! :D
 
Last edited:
UL said:
[...]Plaintiff used his letter to express opinions that, based on the nature of his employment and subject matter of the opinions, could be reasonably construed as being those of his employer. Given that he also wrote that “UL had tested and certified the steel components used to construct the WTC tower,” [...], Plaintiff clearly implied that he was writing as a UL employee. Nowhere in the letter is it stated or even suggested that the opinions expressed were merely his personal opinions. [...] [T]he letter here was sent without the authority, consent, or knowledge of the employer to outside parties [...]. As a result, [...] Plaintiff appeared to be expressing not his own, private opinions but the Company’s position. Consequently, even if UL were a state actor (which it is not), it was still permitted to discharge Plaintiff, and Plaintiff cannot state a § 1983 claim
Click to expand...
Right on! Kevin doesn't have a case :p
 
Just by way of update, I checked today on PACER and there have been no responding documents from Ryan to UL's motion to dismiss filed as yet. I'll check every few days and let you know of any new docs if and when they are filed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom