Dominion Voting Systems v Fake Fox News Corp. aka Rupert Murdoch PAC

[Phil1111 943]

40 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

At this level, I doubt that too.

"Creative fee agreements depart from the typical all-hourly or all-contingent models.  In the former, the client typically bears the financial risk of litigation, as the payment of legal fees is untethered to the ultimate outcome of the case.  In the latter, the economic risk is shifted largely to the lawyer, as payment of fees is entirely contingent upon a successful outcome for the client.  Creative fee agreements blend aspects of the hourly and contingent models to re-allocate the risk of litigation based upon client needs and goals, and the lawyer’s tolerance for risk. 

Commercial litigation clients increasingly desire creative fee agreements because they can be tailored to a client’s particular financial reality. A client, for instance, may have a large complex case worth $20,000,000, which would take $100,000 in legal fees per month to properly fund, but a stream of only $20,000 per month to allocate toward legal expenses.  A creative fee agreement under these circumstances might consist of an agreement to cap monthly fees at $20,000 per month, with a 15% contingent interest in the client’s recovery.  Such an arrangement would take into account the client’s ongoing ability to pay legal expenses as well as align client and lawyer interests in achieving a significant recovery."

From 'This article appeared in the Spring 2013 issue of the Oregon State Bar's Litigation Journal."

Edited April 19, 2023 by Phil1111

[SkyDekker 1,155]

11 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

From 'This article appeared in the Spring 2013 issue of the Oregon State Bar's Litigation Journal."

And they have continued to rise in popularity in the subsequent 10 years, except your googling couldn't find any mention of them?

Again, it is possible, but in this case I find it highly unlikely.

[SkyDekker 1,155]

21 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

The judge has installed a Special Master to investigate if FOX abided by the rules of discovery and whether it purposely held back materials. the Special Master can depose anybody he wants and all at FOX's dime.

This also likely will not end well for FOX.

Unfortunately this Special Master may have led to the settlement by Fox. This investigation dies with it.

[Phil1111 943]

18 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

And they have continued to rise in popularity in the subsequent 10 years, except your googling couldn't find any mention of them?

Again, it is possible, but in this case I find it highly unlikely.

Considering that you're challenging a statement that I made w/o any reference to outside sources.I guess you're the expert in US big case litigation. So I'll leave that in your domain.

Bloomberg law as a more complete list of all the compensation streams. But you know it all already.

Edited April 19, 2023 by Phil1111

[normiss 644]

42 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Unfortunately this Special Master may have led to the settlement by Fox. This investigation dies with it.

I wonder if Smartmatic can use that evidence in their lawsuit.....coming up next!

Then Newsmax, then OAN, Giuliani, Pillow face guy.....Civil Rape, NY, Georgia, fraud, racketeering, for Trump. I'm sure Trump has more on his plate, with ketchup.

Trump legal case list is unreal!

Seems nothing but lies, defamation, and lawsuits!

[SkyDekker 1,155]

30 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Considering that you're challenging a statement that I made w/o any reference to outside sources.I guess you're the expert in US big case litigation. So I'll leave that in your domain.

Bloomberg law as a more complete list of all the compensation streams. But you know it all already.

No expert at all, just trying to use some common sense. These types of cases are exceedingly hard to win and Dominion was using high caliber law firms, why would a law firm agree to a full or part contingency contract?

[jakee 1,280]

4 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

No expert at all, just trying to use some common sense. These types of cases are exceedingly hard to win and Dominion was using high caliber law firms, why would a law firm agree to a full or part contingency contract?

Oh, from the law firm's side of it? Presumably because they watched Fox dig their own grave on live TV just like the rest of us. I thought you meant why would Dominion have signed away a chunk of their settlement.

[SkyDekker 1,155]

3 minutes ago, jakee said:

Presumably because they watched Fox dig their own grave on live TV just like the rest of us.

That was nowhere near enough. Only once the information they got through deposition came out did it become clear Dominion had a very strong case. Again, these cases are exceedingly hard to win and are almost without precedent

 

5 minutes ago, jakee said:

I thought you meant why would Dominion have signed away a chunk of their settlement.

I mean, they already did, they sued for about $1 BILLION more than they settled for.

[JerryBaumchen 1,083]

1 hour ago, normiss said:

I wonder if Smartmatic can use that evidence in their lawsuit.....coming up next!

Then Newsmax, then OAN, Giuliani, Pillow face guy.....Civil Rape, NY, Georgia, fraud, racketeering, for Trump. I'm sure Trump has more on his plate, with ketchup.

Trump legal case list is unreal!

Seems nothing but lies, defamation, and lawsuits!

Hi Mark,

Re:  Seems nothing but lies, defamation, and lawsuits!

Ain't life sweet.

Jerry Baumchen

[gowlerk 1,956]

6 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

I mean, they already did, they sued for about $1 BILLION more than they settled for.

As someone posted earlier Dominion is owned by a private equity firm. No doubt that firm has the resources to pay for the legal talent needed to win this case. It always would have been a gamble, but private equity is a game played by sharks. They gambled and won big time. This settlement is worth many times the value of Dominion. They took on Murdoch and won. It was never about justice and they never needed an on air apology. Money talks, bullshit walks.

[SkyDekker 1,155]

15 hours ago, gowlerk said:

This settlement is worth many times the value of Dominion.

An amount that is so large it is extremely likely it would have 1) not been awarded in the first place 2) would not have withstood appeal.

[gowlerk 1,956]

11 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

An amount that is so large it is extremely likely it would have 1) not been awarded in the first place 2) would not have withstood appeal.

Yes, I can only assume that they settled mostly to avoid having to testify.

[jakee 1,280]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

An amount that is so large it is extremely likely it would have 1) not been awarded in the first place 2) would not have withstood appeal.

Right, so they didn't just sign away a chunk of their settlement by accepting it, did they? They got the max they could possibly get.

[SkyDekker 1,155]

5 minutes ago, jakee said:

Right, so they didn't just sign away a chunk of their settlement by accepting it, did they? They got the max they could possibly get.

No, that isn't what I said. There is always the chance the jury would award and it would somehow stand at appeal. You don't know until you go through the process. 

[gowlerk 1,956]

18 minutes ago, jakee said:

Right, so they didn't just sign away a chunk of their settlement by accepting it, did they? They got the max they could possibly get.

They did quite well. It was a gamble. You have to know when to walk away from the table as a winner. They played the cards they had in their hand very well. They could have forced another draw, but instead they successfully got the other side to fold. With 3/4 of a billion sitting on the table. Which is really 1.5 Billion when you consider that money could have gone either direction. FOX leaves the game with their tail between their legs and looking pretty stupid.

Edited April 20, 2023 by gowlerk

[ryoder 1,412]

Guardian: Lachlan Murdoch drops defamation proceedings against independent Australian publisher Crikey

Murdoch said he was confident he would have won but he “does not wish to further enable Crikey’s use of the court to litigate a case from another jurisdiction that has already been settled and facilitate a marketing campaign designed to attract subscribers and boost their profits”.

Riiiiggghhthttttt; That must be the reason.

[ryoder 1,412]

WHOA!!!

WSJ: Tucker Carlson is leaving Fox News

[SkyDekker 1,155]

8 minutes ago, ryoder said:

WHOA!!!

WSJ: Tucker Carlson is leaving Fox News

A week later....certainly makes you wonder if they are connected.

[ryoder 1,412]

3 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

A week later....certainly makes you wonder if they are connected.

The statement from Fox:

“FOX News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways. We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor. Mr. Carlson’s last program was Friday April 21st. Fox News Tonight will air live at 8 PM/ET starting this evening as an interim show helmed by rotating FOX News personalities until a new host is named.”

I'm thinking this was Murdoch's decision, not Carlson's decision.

Source: https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/tucker-carlson-fox-news-out-rcna81147

[SkyDekker 1,155]

1 minute ago, ryoder said:

I'm thinking this was Murdoch's decision, not Carlson's decision.

No doubt it was. I am just very curious if the decision was forced on him.

[billvon 2,477]

16 minutes ago, ryoder said:

WHOA!!!

WSJ: Tucker Carlson is leaving Fox News

Thoughts and prayers.

I have a feeling he will have no problem getting a job at OAN, Truth Social, Stormfront or some other fine journalistic organization.

[ryoder 1,412]

3 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

No doubt it was. I am just very curious if the decision was forced on him.

More lawsuits coming, (eg Smartmatic), Murdoch may think the courts will look more favorably on Fox "News", if they have thrown some liars overboard. i.e. Carlson became a financial liability, so he had to go.

[gowlerk 1,956]

Carlson is probably contemplating running for president.

[ryoder 1,412]

Apparently, another liar left 4 days ago:

The Hill: Dan Bongino parts ways with Fox News

[JoeWeber 2,355]

41 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

No doubt it was. I am just very curious if the decision was forced on him.

Or offered as a part of the package.  All plausible.