What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

I bet you Godeell would've handled this diffrently (1 Viewer)

The litigation was threatened only if an actual injury occured. If it did, the Browns would have been dead-in-the-water in any action brought and that letter would have been Exhibit A. If I were the attorney who had received that I would have been doing cartwheels, punitive damages alone would have run in the millions in 1974 dollars. Highly unlikely this type of injury would occur, but if it had happened to anyone (not just in the party of the letter writer) this attorney could represent them on a contingency basis and the Browns would have had to settle out of court, as I can imagine a jury looking at this letter and the plaintiff wearing an eye-patch for a lost eye and then bringing back a verdict in record time.

Taking it further, if some injury actually had happened, this letter probably would have been reprinted in tort texbooks found in every law school on how not to respond to someone pointing out potential liability for a client one represents. I personally think this is a hoax, I can't imagine any attorney being that stupid as to sign his name to this, but who knows, maybe it is legitimate.

 
Ironically, wasn't it a Brown's player hit in the eye with a penalty flag? Paper planes, bean bags, what's the difference?

That is a great response though - hoping it's real.

 
The litigation was threatened only if an actual injury occured. If it did, the Browns would have been dead-in-the-water in any action brought and that letter would have been Exhibit A. If I were the attorney who had received that I would have been doing cartwheels, punitive damages alone would have run in the millions in 1974 dollars. Highly unlikely this type of injury would occur, but if it had happened to anyone (not just in the party of the letter writer) this attorney could represent them on a contingency basis and the Browns would have had to settle out of court, as I can imagine a jury looking at this letter and the plaintiff wearing an eye-patch for a lost eye and then bringing back a verdict in record time.Taking it further, if some injury actually had happened, this letter probably would have been reprinted in tort texbooks found in every law school on how not to respond to someone pointing out potential liability for a client one represents. I personally think this is a hoax, I can't imagine any attorney being that stupid as to sign his name to this, but who knows, maybe it is legitimate.
I read the first letter to state that the attorney's client's, well aware of a risk of injury, intend to undertake a voluntary activity for their own joy and amusement in spite of a known risk. Telling someone to control the behavior of others, or failing in the same that they are then responsible therefore does not make it so.
 
Ironically, wasn't it a Brown's player hit in the eye with a penalty flag? Paper planes, bean bags, what's the difference?That is a great response though - hoping it's real.
Dear Orlando Brown's attorney,Attached is a letter that we received on December 17, 1999. I feel that you should be aware that some a__hole is signing your name to stupid letters.Very truly yours,Al Lerner
 
Would have been great if they included the original letter in the response.......folded up as a paper airplane.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top