Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2017, 02:40:50 PM
75132 Posts in 1768 Topics by 359 Members
Latest Member: nic4real
Home Help Login Register
TalkLeft Discussion Forums  |  Topics  |  Duke Players' Civil lawsuit  |  Giuliani Vs. Duke 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Giuliani Vs. Duke  (Read 3810 times)
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Giuliani Vs. Duke
« on: July 24, 2008, 05:04:09 PM »

  Doesn't Duke administration ever learn anything? Recently there was the notorious  fake drug bust
  Now Rudi Giulian'i's boy is suing them for violating his civil rights .He is being represented by Bob Eckstrand who,as everyone here knows  filed  that amazing four hundred and fifty something page brief on behallf of certian of the Lacrosse players(lnks above) and also defended the falsely accused "druggies".
   While Duke still has any money left,I suggest that its board in self-defense forthwith  require the  entire admministrative staff from Steele and Brodhead downwards  to  take a  crash remedial course iin judicial liability.
   Of course the board  could also cut down a bit further on their losses if  Burness,Steele Brodhead,et.al,were compelled to take double(may be triple) employment as groundspeople,janitors,and roofers until they pay back a small portion of the Duke money they  squandered while intimidating teenagers.
   Link:
 
  http://www.wral.com/asset/news/state/2008/07/24/3262235/Andrew_Giuliani_vs_Duke.swf
Logged
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2008, 03:22:47 PM »

   Young Giuliani may actually look like a bit of an ass in this affair(after all the majority of his own team voted to kick him out) but, when his suit is considered  as demonstrating part of a contining  pattern of Duke administrative abuse,his complaint seems to carry some merit.
    Consider the allegations concerning  one Kate Hendricks in the Guliani Suit and compare the similar allegations against her in the Lacrosse suit where she is named as a defendant,further consider that in both cases Duke administration refused to meet with the aggrieved parents(though even  Brodhead,though  he does not appreciat  who Rae Evans is,should appreciate who the Giulianis are) and finally that Ms.Hendricks appears in the Lacrosse case to have given extremely misleading  evidence respecting the key cards which played such an important part in the alibi evidence.
    Credits to Balso,the first one to catch these tidbits:
         



Posts:1,367
Group:Tier2
Member#45
Joined:Apr 28, 2008
  Kate Hendricks in the Giuliani Lawsuit - Not named as a party

49. Bernard delegated the responsibility for investigating O.D. Vincent’s misconduct to Deputy General Counsel, Kate Hendricks. At the time, and throughout her investigation, Ms. Hendricks was in Mississippi, on extended leave from her duties. The Hendricks’ investigation was a sham.

50. Ms. Hendricks promised Andrew’s counsel personally that she would meet with Andrew as part of the investigation. Ms. Hendricks never met with or spoke with Andrew at all.

51. At the conclusion of Hendricks’ “investigation,” and knowing that Andrew's mother and step-father had requested a meeting with Provost Peter Lange, Ms. Bernard issued an uninvited and unannounced opinion letter based ostensibly on the Hendricks’ investigation (“Bernard’s Opinion”). Bernard’s Opinion ignored numerous positive letters from other individuals, including student-athletes at Duke, describing Andrew’s interaction with other students, and attesting to Andrew’s good sportsmanship and good character. None of these individuals was interviewed. Nevertheless, Bernard’s Opinion, issued on behalf of the University, purports to declare the facts of the matter and establish the University’s legal conclusions with respect to Andrew's rights under the Contract. Giuliani Lawsuit

So where did we hear of Kate Hendricks before?

CooperKirk's Lacrosse Team Lawsuit

COUNT SIX175
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS -- II
(Against Defendants Duke University, DUHS, Richard Brodhead, Larry Moneta, Peter Lange, John Burness, Tallman Trask, Sue Wasiolek, Victor Dzau,
Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond, the Duke Police)

COUNT SEVEN177
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS — II
(Against Defendants Duke University, DUHS, Richard Brodhead, Larry Moneta, Peter Lange, Sue Wasiolek, John Burness, Tallman Trask, Victor Dzau,Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond, Duke Police)

COUNT EIGHT178
FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD
(Against Defendants Duke University, Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond, the Duke Police, the Durham Investigators, the City of Durham)

COUNT NINE180
NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
(Duke University, Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond)

COUNT TEN180
ABUSE OF PROCESS AND CONSPIRACY TO ABUSE PROCESS
(Against Defendants Duke University, Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond, the Duke Police, the Durham Investigators, the City of Durham)

What was Kate Hendricks role?

COUNT EIGHT
FRAUD AND CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD
(Against Defendants Duke University, Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond, the Duke Police, the Durham Investigators, the City of Durham)

531.Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 530 above as if set forth fully herein.

532. The letters sent to the plaintiffs and their attorneys by defendants Kate Hendricks and Matthew Drummond constituted false representations and/or concealment of the material fact that defendant Duke University had already disclosed the plaintiffs' confidential March 13 and 14 key card reports to the Durham Investigators in violation of FERPA.

533.These representations and concealments were reasonably calculated to deceive plaintiffs and their counsel, and did in fact deceive them, into believing that Duke had not already disclosed the key card information.

534.On information and belief, the above-named defendants and/or other senior Duke University and Durham officials were aware that Duke had already disclosed this information to the Durham Investigators. These misrepresentations and concealments were made with intent to deceive plaintiffs.

535.Plaintiffs and their attorneys reasonably believed and relied upon the representation that the key card information had not been disclosed. Among other things, they expended significant time, effort, resources, and attorney's fees in moving to quash the sham subpoena that Nifong had served for the key card reports that he already had. The above-named defendants, and/or other Duke University and Durham officials knew that this subpoena was a sham.

536.On information and belief, the above-named defendants conspired and collaborated with one another in issuing the sham subpoena and the fraudulent letters with the intent to deceive plaintiffs and to conceal Duke University's illegal prior disclosure, and the Durham Investigators' illegal prior use, of the key card reports.

537.Defendants' actions, individually and in concert, were fraudulent, willful and wanton, and malicious.
538.The actions of the above-named defendants, individually and jointly, were performed in the scope of employment. On information and belief, Duke University

COUNT NINE
NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
(Duke University, Kate Hendricks, Matthew Drummond)
539.Plaintiffs incorporate the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 538 above as if set forth fully herein.

540.Even if the misrepresentations and concealments alleged above were not intentional, they were performed by the above-named defendants in breach of their duty to take care not to make false statements to and/or conceal material facts from plaintiffs. The plaintiffs justifiably relied to their detriment on defendants' misrepresentations and concealments.

541.As a direct and foreseeable consequence of defendants' misrepresentations, plaintiffs suffered injuries including the expenditure of time, effort, resources, and attorney's fees in quashing the sham subpoena.
 
Logged
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2008, 05:05:01 PM »

   It was obvious, almost from the beginning of the Duke case ,that the then defendants  were attracting an incredibly diverse(and impassioned)  consensus which  could  never again agree on anythiing whatsoever.
  Another example came up the other day when Jim Cooney(Reade Seligmann's saviour)signed on as Duke's defense counsel this time in the Giuliani  suit.No reason he shouldn't,of couse.But some of our former  fellow bloggers are printing very rough words indeed.
   http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1165338.html
Logged
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2008, 04:29:08 PM »

  A colleague of Giuliani speaks up in defense  of Duke:
    http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=25547

       
Logged
MarkRougemont
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377



Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2008, 05:27:28 PM »

 Let me see if I have a full understanding of this.  He is not only a less than average golfer by Duke's team standards but his conduct is poor as well.  Not one team member wanted him back on the team.  And this guy is suing Duke?
Logged
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2008, 03:13:08 PM »

   Duke,in the person of former Lacross  attorney,Jim Cooney,has filed its reply to the Giuliani law suit,which I have filed here.As Duke (which no longer holds the highest academic credibility levels) tells it Mother  Giuliani is behaving like Wahneeba Lubiano,Karla Holloway and  Hurricane Katrina all rolled into one.What's more her punk of a kid never placed higher than thirty-six in any tournanment in his life and,among much other disgusting behavior ,he spit a well chewed apple into the face of a team mate.Five of his six closest associates voted to throw him off the team and he is damn lucky they tolerated him so long as they did.The court is requested to dismiss the suit.
    Gee,even CDR's worst enemies have never accused  them of spitting apples in people's faces.Nobody has even Crystal and Nifong  of spitting apples at people.This case could get even rougher when the Giulianis reply.
Logged
MarkRougemont
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377



Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #6 on: September 11, 2008, 03:25:03 PM »

"ANDREW GIULIANI now sues COACH VINCENT and DUKE
UNIVERSITY, claiming that under a non-existent contract
ANDREW GIULIANI was promised something that no athlete at
DUKE UNIVERSITY - - scholarship or non-scholarship - - has
ever received: a guaranteed place on a varsity athletic
team regardless of his conduct or his ability and lifetime
access and privileges to the DUKE UNIVERSITY golf course; a
privilege never enjoyed by any student, graduate or member
of the golf team of DUKE UNIVERSITY."

  A lot of interesting information in the answer, Sydney, maybe they are just hoping the timing is right in terms of Duke must be at fault opinion.  Certainly promises to be interesting. 
Logged
Sydney Carton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1577


Re: Giuliani Vs. Duke
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2008, 01:06:28 PM »

  Vincent resigns as Duke coach
By LANCE RINGLER
Assistant Editor

Halfway through his second season as Duke men’s golf coach, O.D. Vincent has resigned, Golfweek has learned. He is expected to be named senior associate athletic director at the University of Washington, his alma mater, on Monday.

In that position, Vincent, 40, would oversee the day-to-day operations of football, men’s and women’s crew, men’s and women’s tennis, men’s and women’s swimming, athletic media relations, and marketing and promotions. Jeff Compher, former executive associate athletic director at Washington, left the school last spring to become the athletic director at Northern Illinois.

“Over the years, I have had a lot conversations regarding athletic administration,” Vincent said. “I am excited for the opportunity to start this new chapter back home at the University of Washington. I look forward to being a proponent for coaches and giving them a forum to voice their opinions, because the coaches and student-athletes are the stars of the show. Focusing on them is by far and away the focus of what we do.”

Earlier this fall, Vincent and Duke were named in a civil lawsuit filed by Andrew Giuliani, the son of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Andrew Giuliani claimed he was wrongfully kicked off the school’s golf team. When asked whether his resignation from Duke had anything to do with the lawsuit, Vincent said “absolutely not.”

snipped...
http://www.golfweek.com/college/mens/story/vincent-duke-resign-news-121408

   SC:
     Whatever the reason,when is the last time we heard of a prominent coach deserting his team in mid-season?Moreover,his removal will certainly facilitate a settlement between Duke and the Giulianis.
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Advertise Here