Question for the lawyers on the board

PURPLECAT88 · May 9, 2024

I read the article in this morning's Trib referencing Nathan Fox and others joining the lawsuit. Like everyone, I have opinions, but before getting into those, I wanted to ask about something in the story.
First it says:

In a move with wide-ranging implications for all the lawsuits, a judge ruled last month that the hazing accusers’ cases should, for now, be consolidated with the Fitzgerald case.

Than it says:

Attorney Dan Webb, who represents Fitzgerald, had no immediate comment. But in announcing Fitzgerald’s lawsuit against the school last year, Webb said he hadn’t surfaced any evidence of hazing among the Wildcat squad.
He painted the accusers as opportunistic, saying, “People will think there’s a chance to get a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, and they will file lawsuits that are not merited.”

Does this mean
a) Webb had no choice as to whether the cases would be consolidated?
b) Webb has changed his tune about the accusers, and is now willing to work with them?
c) Webb still thinks the accusers are greedy opportunists but is willing to work with them anyway because it will put NU in such a trick bag that it will help his/Fitz's case?
or
d) Something my non-lawyerly mind has not thought of?

fcmchi · May 9, 2024