NU FB lawsuits

[curdog]

“So, (insert staffer here) testified that this was well-known, but you did not know?”
“I had no idea.”
“No idea?”
“The locker room is where they do their horseplay.”

“Okay. And (manager name) said that she found out about running within three weeks of coming to NU. And you had no idea.”
“No idea.”
“What is running, Mr. Fitzgerald?”
“Running is when you rapidly put one foot in front of the other.”

In testimony, he’d have to admit that he had no idea what was happening, while everyone else knew. Or he’d have to acknowledge that, even though he’s on record as a staunch anti-hazing advocate, that he simply excused it.

Those things are all reputationally damaging.

His lawyers’ best bet is to stick to the letter of the contract — which appears to have no ‘zero tolerance’ hazing clause, and no responsibility for players behavior, and only apparent responsibility for coaches felonious behavior — and get what they can (which will be a lot because, after all, Fitz got paid a lot).

The reporting indicates that there was no particularly egregious behavior by individuals. There are no broomsticks in orifices and there are no chocolate swirlies and there are no hospitalizations. There would not be sufficient evidence of individual convictions.

There was just, quite simply, a culture where it was accepted that young players and backups would deal with some harassment. The culture had problems. The head coach was blind to it.

He will not testify because it will make him look bad.

Man, you seem to know a lot of facts about the case before it started. Impressive.

Also, no calls to find out who perpetrated the alleged acts. Take a lap

 

[curdog]

“So, (insert staffer here) testified that this was well-known, but you did not know?”
“I had no idea.”
“No idea?”
“The locker room is where they do their horseplay.”

“Okay. And (manager name) said that she found out about running within three weeks of coming to NU. And you had no idea.”
“No idea.”
“What is running, Mr. Fitzgerald?”
“Running is when you rapidly put one foot in front of the other.”

In testimony, he’d have to admit that he had no idea what was happening, while everyone else knew. Or he’d have to acknowledge that, even though he’s on record as a staunch anti-hazing advocate, that he simply excused it.

Those things are all reputationally damaging.

His lawyers’ best bet is to stick to the letter of the contract — which appears to have no ‘zero tolerance’ hazing clause, and no responsibility for players behavior, and only apparent responsibility for coaches felonious behavior — and get what they can (which will be a lot because, after all, Fitz got paid a lot).

The reporting indicates that there was no particularly egregious behavior by individuals. There are no broomsticks in orifices and there are no chocolate swirlies and there are no hospitalizations. There would not be sufficient evidence of individual convictions.

There was just, quite simply, a culture where it was accepted that young players and backups would deal with some harassment. The culture had problems. The head coach was blind to it.

He will not testify because it will make him look bad.

That’s hilarious. Egregious enough activity to fire a coach with a sterling reputation but not egregious enough to punish the alleged perpetrators. That’s some tightrope you are walking.

 

[NUCat320]

@curdog , didn’t really want to dip any further in here. It’s a good thread for updates and I don’t want it to get capped😂

He could have truly had no idea. It’s just implausible.

I appreciate your passion.

Go Braun. Go whoever is playing quarterback next season. Go lakeside football. Go Cats!

 

[curdog]

@curdog , didn’t really want to dip any further in here. It’s a good thread for updates and I don’t want it to get capped😂

He could have truly had no idea. It’s just implausible.

I appreciate your passion.

Go Braun. Go whoever is playing quarterback next season. Go lakeside football. Go Cats!

Whatever dude. I’m in the wait and see camp and you and many others are in the pitchfork camp. Might want to wait until more info comes out before making such claims. Have a good one.

 

[IGNORE2]

I really don't believe that the players' claims are worth much, and the big exposure for NU remains the Fitz claim, It's difficult to imagine, therefore, that NU would want to depose Fitz, thereby potentially increasing the value of his claim. Thus, I remain of the opinion that all claims will be settled without any discovery depositions being taken. Of course. I have no insider information, and have not accessed any of the court filings, and my opinion is based solely on my own experience handling many high exposure lawsuits.

Sure, but you know the plaintiffs will and NU will be there.

 

[IGNORE2]

Isn't the university essentially on the side of the former players?

Pay them some $5 million to go away, but only after getting testimony under oath of how badly they were abused by Fitzgerald, who knew and directed the punishments, knowing that the players were suffering, etc. Basically pay for testimony that they'd never get if they deposed the same players to speak out against Fitzgerald in his lawsuit.

Having "established" that, NU then has ammunition to go after Fitzgerald?

Just speculating as to NU's strategy. (Not the ethics)

NU is a defendant to all cases.

 

[IGNORE2]

Fitz does not want to be on the stand. Insisting that he had no idea what was happening in his program would be damaging to his reputation as well.

Is it worse for your program to have a decade-plus car wash tradition, or for the person in charge to have no idea at all?

This is an important part. If PF wins his case, it shows a coach oblivious to his own program. A program that was a dumpster fire by the time he was canned. Doesn’t sound like hc material at any level.

 

[IGNORE2]

He has already admitted he had no idea it was happening! The report said there was no evidence he knew about it (you can’t prove a negative so no evidence is the best you can do).

Again, when will we find out who the actual perpetrators are (after all they potentially committed sexual assault). The fire Fitz crowd does not seem too concerned to find out.

As a vocal member of the fire fitz crowd, I most certainly want to know the perpetrators. And discovery is that tool.

If I’ma clueless PF, I want to know those names too. In order to get platter deps, PF will have to sit for his too.

 

[IGNORE2]

“So, (insert staffer here) testified that this was well-known, but you did not know?”
“I had no idea.”
“No idea?”
“The locker room is where they do their horseplay.”

“Okay. And (manager name) said that she found out about running within three weeks of coming to NU. And you had no idea.”
“No idea.”
“What is running, Mr. Fitzgerald?”
“Running is when you rapidly put one foot in front of the other.”

In testimony, he’d have to admit that he had no idea what was happening, while everyone else knew. Or he’d have to acknowledge that, even though he’s on record as a staunch anti-hazing advocate, that he simply excused it.

Those things are all reputationally damaging.

His lawyers’ best bet is to stick to the letter of the contract — which appears to have no ‘zero tolerance’ hazing clause, and no responsibility for players behavior, and only apparent responsibility for coaches felonious behavior — and get what they can (which will be a lot because, after all, Fitz got paid a lot).

The reporting indicates that there was no particularly egregious behavior by individuals. There are no broomsticks in orifices and there are no chocolate swirlies and there are no hospitalizations. There would not be sufficient evidence of individual convictions.

There was just, quite simply, a culture where it was accepted that young players and backups would deal with some harassment. The culture had problems. The head coach was blind to it.

He will not testify because it will make him look bad.

And if I’m NU, I offer nuisance value with no admission of liability or dare him to go to trial. Cuz you are correct, and my closing would include, his own testimony, and arrogance, make him unhirable. NU didn’t cause that.

 

[IGNORE2]

That’s hilarious. Egregious enough activity to fire a coach with a sterling reputation but not egregious enough to punish the alleged perpetrators. That’s some tightrope you are walking.

Might have some statute of limitations challenges to punish the perpetrators. But, ahem, I’m calling for them to also be named and face public scrutiny.

Discovery should lead to that. Since you also want to know who, you must be rooting for no settlement, correct?

 

[No Chores]

Fitz does not want to be on the stand. Insisting that he had no idea what was happening in his program would be damaging to his reputation as well.

Is it worse for your program to have a decade-plus car wash tradition, or for the person in charge to have no idea at all?

IMHO nobody will testify in this case, either by way of trial or deposition. If the University wants to over pay a few of the players in this case, they are free to do so, despite the fact that they are not entitled to much.

 

[curdog]

Might have some statute of limitations challenges to punish the perpetrators. But, ahem, I’m calling for them to also be named and face public scrutiny.

Discovery should lead to that. Since you also want to know who, you must be rooting for no settlement, correct?

100% I am hoping for no settlement. Methinks this is much ado about nothing

 

[curdog]

And if I’m NU, I offer nuisance value with no admission of liability or dare him to go to trial. Cuz you are correct, and my closing would include, his own testimony, and arrogance, make him unhirable. NU didn’t cause that.

He is unhireable because of this “scandal”. If this scandal is a nothing burger, he will be on a college sideline in no time (probably not as head coach).

 

[No Chores]

And if I’m NU, I offer nuisance value with no admission of liability or dare him to go to trial. Cuz you are correct, and my closing would include, his own testimony, and arrogance, make him unhirable. NU didn’t cause that.

Could not disagree more, and it is simply not going to happen

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

This is an important part. If PF wins his case, it shows a coach oblivious to his own program. A program that was a dumpster fire by the time he was canned. Doesn’t sound like hc material at any level.

Bob, you can call me whatever you want and sully my reputation to Kingdom Come for $100M.

 

[IGNORE2]

He is unhireable because of this “scandal”. If this scandal is a nothing burger, he will be on a college sideline in no time (probably not as head coach).

He is still the guy that was running a dumpster fire and knew less about his locker room than the reporters and managers. And that is by his own admission and by design.

I wouldn’t want that to be my hc if I’m AD for anything more than a participation trophy program.

 

[IGNORE2]

Could not disagree more, and it is simply not going to happen

You may be right, you were a more conventional trial attorney than me. But I defended dumpster fires, found a crease and saved my client (insurance company) millions.

This situation is so unique to me - the cross parties, the nature of the allegations, the money at stake…

Kicker is that none of saw the report. There are also lots of people with more knowledge about what is out there. As factors like the political climate for universities and PF wanting a future that includes coaching his kids. I can see this going so many directions.

But with what I know so far, I take a ‘try it’ approach and start digging into discovery.

 

[IGNORE2]

Bob, you can call me whatever you want and sully my reputation to Kingdom Come for $100M.

You too! I need a vacation. Tahiti is too far away. (Three weeks)

 

[curdog]

He is still the guy that was running a dumpster fire and knew less about his locker room than the reporters and managers. And that is by his own admission and by design.

I wouldn’t want that to be my hc if I’m AD for anything more than a participation trophy program.

As I said in my post, he would likely not be a HC. Reading comprehension

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

NU is a defendant to all cases.

I understand that.
My point is that NU will use the depositions in the "Players vs NU" lawsuit to get obtain statements from the litigating players that NU will then use in their defense against Fitzgerald.
NU will then reach a settlement with those players.
Essentially paying the former players to exaggerate claims against Fitzgerald, under oath.

 

[No Chores]

I understand that.
My point is that NU will use the depositions in the "Players vs NU" lawsuit to get obtain statements from the litigating players that NU will then use in their defense against Fitzgerald.
NU will then reach a settlement with those players.
Essentially paying the former players to exaggerate claims against Fitzgerald, under oath.

Do you really believe this nonsense?

 

[IGNORE2]

Do you really believe this nonsense?

Let’s see what we get from the examinations under oath. If PF was truly clueless then he has no idea what’s in store. None of us do either.

But a handful of well heeled plaintiff lawyers are following through so….

And if the firing was as baseless and reckless as your side believes, pretty odd that nobody got fired - neither Gagg nor schill despite such wildly expensive and disrespectful termination of the golden boy. Has to make you wonder.

I kinda think you hope, rather than believe, this will go away pre-discovery because you’re afraid about what will come out in discovery.

 

[curdog]

Let’s see what we get from the examinations under oath. If PF was truly clueless then he has no idea what’s in store. None of us do either.

But a handful of well heeled plaintiff lawyers are following through so….

And if the firing was as baseless and reckless as your side believes, pretty odd that nobody got fired - neither Gagg nor schill despite such wildly expensive and disrespectful termination of the golden boy. Has to make you wonder.

I kinda think you hope, rather than believe, this will go away pre-discovery because you’re afraid about what will come out in discovery.

Are you sure you are a lawyer? The school is going to keep Gragg and Schill around until all these suits are settled. It’s common sense, the school wants its interests and those 2 clowns’ interests aligned.

 

[NUChicago]

Are you sure you are a lawyer? The school is going to keep Gragg and Schill around until all these suits are settled. It’s common sense, the school wants its interests and those 2 clowns’ interests aligned.

in Gragg we trust!

 

[No Chores]

Let’s see what we get from the examinations under oath. If PF was truly clueless then he has no idea what’s in store. None of us do either.

But a handful of well heeled plaintiff lawyers are following through so….

And if the firing was as baseless and reckless as your side believes, pretty odd that nobody got fired - neither Gagg nor schill despite such wildly expensive and disrespectful termination of the golden boy. Has to make you wonder.

I kinda think you hope, rather than believe, this will go away pre-discovery because you’re afraid about what will come out in discovery.

I'm expressing an opinion based on 53 years of practicing law and trying a number of multi-million dollar lawsuits. Also, I'm not "hoping" for anything. I truly believe that all cases will be settled prior to any depositions being taken. Also, I'm feeling rather lucky that I was never sued over the years despite my rather active "dry-humping" career!

 

[FeralFelidae]

And if the firing was as baseless and reckless as your side believes, pretty odd that nobody got fired - neither Gagg nor schill despite such wildly expensive and disrespectful termination of the golden boy. Has to make you wonder.

No, because Schill did the firing. He's not going to fire himself.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Do you really believe this nonsense?

Sure, why not?

Explain to me why the exaggerated testimony the players provide under oath in their lawsuit against NU wouldn't be used by NU in their defense against Fitzgerald, especially if they're saying Fitzgerald was aware of the "hazing" incidents.

Its so easy to call scenarios "nonsense" without explaining why. Its one of the weak argument "techniques" we see around here too often.

I'm trusting that you actually do have some expertise in this area, so feel free to explain your insult.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Sure, why not?

Explain to me why the exaggerated testimony the players provide under oath in their lawsuit against NU wouldn't be used by NU in their defense against Fitzgerald, especially if they're saying Fitzgerald was aware of the "hazing" incidents.

Its so easy to call scenarios "nonsense" without explaining why. Its one of the weak argument "techniques" we see around here too often.

I'm trusting that you actually do have some expertise in this area, so feel free to explain your insult.

I'm not a lawyer, but if the accusers perjure themselves, and the university has a role in encouraging them to perjure themselves, and Fitz is able to demonstrate this through witnesses and evidence of his own, then it sounds like the accusers and the university would be opening themselves up to a world of hurt. It sounds like a very risky strategy.

 

[CMcCat]

IMHO nobody will testify in this case, either by way of trial or deposition. If the University wants to over pay a few of the players in this case, they are free to do so, despite the fact that they are not entitled to much.

Why haven’t there been any settlements to date? What is the advantage to NU to extend time? Are the well-heeled plaintiff attorneys for the players smelling blood?

 

[No Chores]

Why haven’t there been any settlements to date? What is the advantage to NU to extend time? Are the well-heeled plaintiff attorneys for the players smelling blood?

If I had to guess, and it's only an educated guess, I would think that settlement negotiations with Fitz are ongoing. If NU settles with Fitz, and a non-disclosure agreement is included in the release, I would think it would be much easier to settle with the aggrieved players. The players' cases are not worth much, and I would not be much interested in representing them.

 

[CMcCat]

If I had to guess, and it's only an educated guess, I would think that settlement negotiations with Fitz are ongoing. If NU settles with Fitz, and a non-disclosure agreement is included in the release, I would think it would be much easier to settle with the aggrieved players. The players' cases are not worth much, and I would not be much interested in representing them.

It seems to me that the attorneys for the players may have interest in developing a new revenue stream. This might make them inclined to secure a most significant result for their NU clients such to induce what I must presume to be a large number of athletes at other institutions who might make similar claims against their schools.

 

[IGNORE2]

Are you sure you are a lawyer? The school is going to keep Gragg and Schill around until all these suits are settled. It’s common sense, the school wants its interests and those 2 clowns’ interests aligned.

So Gagg and schill could shoot someone in the middle of Deer Field at noon on a Monday and not lose their jobs?

I think neither are actually in peril until contract renewal comes up. Schill may be sent packing for non athletic reasons. Gagg may not be renewed for a host of reasons.

The original point was that the decision makers do not find it so atrocious firing the Golden Boy. Has to be a reason - he was Ryan’s little pet. He was Mr NU. Yet he was summarily dismissed at great expense, with much negative PR over something you and NC don’t believe happened in any meaningful way.

What could the BOT know that you don’t?

 

[IGNORE2]

I'm expressing an opinion based on 53 years of practicing law and trying a number of multi-million dollar lawsuits. Also, I'm not "hoping" for anything. I truly believe that all cases will be settled prior to any depositions being taken. Also, I'm feeling rather lucky that I was never sued over the years despite my rather active "dry-humping" career!

Knowing you irl, that image definitely has me rolling on the ground laughing out loud

 

[IGNORE2]

Sure, why not?

Explain to me why the exaggerated testimony the players provide under oath in their lawsuit against NU wouldn't be used by NU in their defense against Fitzgerald, especially if they're saying Fitzgerald was aware of the "hazing" incidents.

Its so easy to call scenarios "nonsense" without explaining why. Its one of the weak argument "techniques" we see around here too often.

I'm trusting that you actually do have some expertise in this area, so feel free to explain your insult.

PWB - you are correct. The threat of a very public trial calls for PF to risk total humiliation, end of his working life and zero judgement. Not that it will happen - but even NC has to admit it could. That’s jury life. Pretty big risk.

Now, let me through another curveball. This is also the perfect case for PF’s lawyer to drag PF to every depo and force the deponent to make his accusations in front of PF. This is what I would do. Might temper some of that testimony - not east to talk trash in front of the guy.

 

[IGNORE2]

I'm not a lawyer, but if the accusers perjure themselves, and the university has a role in encouraging them to perjure themselves, and Fitz is able to demonstrate this through witnesses and evidence of his own, then it sounds like the accusers and the university would be opening themselves up to a world of hurt. It sounds like a very risky strategy.

First, that assumes perjury. Second, have you watched anything in Georgia? Sadly, it’s a real reflection of modern law. Judges despise perjury hearings and motion to sanction.

 

[IGNORE2]

Why haven’t there been any settlements to date? What is the advantage to NU to extend time? Are the well-heeled plaintiff attorneys for the players smelling blood?

No settlements, no court dismissals, no voluntary dismissals. To date.

 

[IGNORE2]

If I had to guess, and it's only an educated guess, I would think that settlement negotiations with Fitz are ongoing. If NU settles with Fitz, and a non-disclosure agreement is included in the release, I would think it would be much easier to settle with the aggrieved players. The players' cases are not worth much, and I would not be much interested in representing them.

Why settle w cross defendant? And if I’m a plaintiff - I’m definitely battling in court to get the terms of the settlement. I can think of a few reasons it would be relevant starting w potential bias of witness.

The last case I settle is the cross defendant. If I end up with any financial liability in the player cases, that becomes part of the cross defendant negotiation.

 

[NUChicago]

So Gagg and schill could shoot someone in the middle of Deer Field at noon on a Monday and not lose their jobs?

I think neither are actually in peril until contract renewal comes up. Schill may be sent packing for non athletic reasons. Gagg may not be renewed for a host of reasons.

The original point was that the decision makers do not find it so atrocious firing the Golden Boy. Has to be a reason - he was Ryan’s little pet. He was Mr NU. Yet he was summarily dismissed at great expense, with much negative PR over something you and NC don’t believe happened in any meaningful way.

What could the BOT know that you don’t?

If Gragg is renewed NU will finally acknowledge publicly that athletics don’t matter.

 

[curdog]

So Gagg and schill could shoot someone in the middle of Deer Field at noon on a Monday and not lose their jobs?

I think neither are actually in peril until contract renewal comes up. Schill may be sent packing for non athletic reasons. Gagg may not be renewed for a host of reasons.

The original point was that the decision makers do not find it so atrocious firing the Golden Boy. Has to be a reason - he was Ryan’s little pet. He was Mr NU. Yet he was summarily dismissed at great expense, with much negative PR over something you and NC don’t believe happened in any meaningful way.

What could the BOT know that you don’t?

You really make no sense dude. If those 2 idiots committed a crime, they would be fired. They won’t be fired until these suits are settled (hopefully the day after). Schill said the decision to fire Fitz was his. Did he go to the board? I would hope so but he screwed things up so badly he probably didn’t.

At the end of the day, schill’s actions are going to cost the school $100 million, give or take. Thats money that could go to financial aid, research, facilities, pay raises for faculty, etc. Instead it will go to Fitz, who be hired as a DC for a BIG program in 2026.

 

[No Chores]

Why settle w cross defendant? And if I’m a plaintiff - I’m definitely battling in court to get the terms of the settlement. I can think of a few reasons it would be relevant starting w potential bias of witness.

The last case I settle is the cross defendant. If I end up with any financial liability in the player cases, that becomes part of the cross defendant negotiation.

Frankly, this makes little sense to me. I remain of the opinion that all cases will be settled prior to the taking of any discovery depositions. NU's legal counsel will not permit Schill to be deposed, and the only way such a deposition can be avoided is if the Fitz case is settled. The players' cases aren't worth much, and I wouldn't pay much if I were defending those cases.