![]() |
|
|||||||
| Law News Breaking law news and events. |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
News
Last Online:
Jul 16th, 2008 11:37 AM Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog
Posts: 564
|
![]() Back in February, we noted that a group of non-indicted Duke University lacrosse players had sued Duke, Durham and several school and police officials in federal court in North Carolina for fraud, abuse and breach of duty for supporting the prosecution of the case against their three falsely-accused teammates. (Click here for the complaint, in which they seek damages for invasion of privacy, emotional distress and other injuries.) At the time, Duke’s GC, Pamela Bernard, said: “Their legal strategy — attacking Duke — is misdirected and without merit.” Now that strategy, which includes a Web site, dukelawsuit.com, has itself become the subject of a dispute between the players and the University, the city of Durham and the Duke University Health System, which have objected in federal court to the site — a blog that tracks the suit and includes links to all the filings. Here’s the NLJ story. The defense lawyers, according to the report, say the site violates rules of the North Carolina Professional Conduct and is likely to prejudice proceedings. In court papers, the lawyers said the site “is aimed at attacking the character, credibility, and reputation of the Duke Defendants.” Lawyers for the 38 Duke lax players, led by Chuck Cooper, of D.C.’s Cooper & Kirk, filed an opposing brief, saying the rule doesn’t apply to civil cases and that most of the information on the site is available through public records. They said the city officials’ attempt to silence the players “gives a new meaning to the concept of gall,” and pointed out that city officials fueled negative publicity about the players when the case surfaced in 2006. Reginald B. Gillespie, of Durham’s Faison & Gillespie, who is representing Durham in the suit, told the NLJ he doesn’t comment on pending litigation. LB readers, what do you think of the Duke plaintiffs’ Web site? Is there anything unethical or, short of that, unseemly, about it? Or are the defendants making a mountain out of a molehill? Last edited by top_admin : Jun 16th, 2008 at 09:23 AM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| step father hurting son | Unregistered | Child Custody & Support | 9 | Nov 26th, 2008 09:04 AM |
| Rights of MMORPG Players? | Utb5 | Internet Law | 3 | Oct 8th, 2008 09:41 AM |
| Judge: Standard Set By Duke Football Team Couldn’t Be Any Lower | WSJ_law_blog | Law News | 0 | Sep 9th, 2008 01:30 PM |
| Fallout from LAffaire Spitzer: Kristen Sues Girls Gone Wild Founder | WSJ_law_blog | Law News | 0 | Apr 29th, 2008 01:00 PM |
| talk of lawsuit hurting sell of home | Unregistered | Civil Litigation | 1 | Aug 22nd, 2007 06:03 PM |