- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Football Player Poisons Classmate at STM (Lafayette)
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:02 pm to boosiebadazz
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:02 pm to boosiebadazz
Esquire, the harshness of your reply tends to make one believe you might be on shaky legal ground. Admitting a known trouble maker back into a civil institution would construe those that did accepting liability for his actions.
Yours,
KemoSabe
Yours,
KemoSabe
2
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:06 pm to TBoy
quote:
So Moose has the criminal case. Who is representing the injured kid in the civil claim?
Apparently KemoSabe does
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:06 pm to KemoSabe65
Good luck at summary judgment
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:13 pm to boosiebadazz
Esquire, do you really think a civil jury isn’t going to azz rape the diocese on this?
J. Minos will be second chair
J. Minos will be second chair
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:15 pm to KemoSabe65
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:18 pm to KemoSabe65
It won’t get to a jury. It may not even get into discovery 
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:22 pm to boosiebadazz
Because of the law, or because an STM alumni is a lawyer and will protect his “school” with a loose interpretation of the law?
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:24 pm to Ric Flair
quote:
Because of the law, or because an STM alumni is a lawyer and will protect his “school” with a loose interpretation of the law?
Option C: it will be cheaper in both money and publicity for everyone involved so they’ll settle.
This post was edited on 10/6/20 at 7:25 pm
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:27 pm to Indefatigable
Question. If they settle for one million, does that come from the school endowment or is there a slush fund for general catholic settlements that they can draw from?
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:27 pm to Ric Flair
I posted what the Louisiana Supreme Court said about when and how a school board can be held liable for the criminal conduct of students.
Give me your best argument for constructive notice of this particular act by the kid.
Give me your best argument for constructive notice of this particular act by the kid.
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:29 pm to Indefatigable
The diocese wouldn’t stand a chance in hell in a civil suit. Gilbert Gauthier would be front and center. Too bad pretentiousness isn’t criminal or the entire diocese and membership would be guilty as charged.
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:30 pm to Ric Flair
quote:
If they settle for one million, does that come from the school endowment or is there a slush fund for general catholic settlements that they can draw from?
I’m not well versed on the case, but if it’s the diocese doing the settling, my money is on the latter. This is the Catholic Church we are talking about. They’re one of the wealthiest entities on earth with an unmatched history of making things go away with money
This post was edited on 10/6/20 at 7:31 pm
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:31 pm to KemoSabe65
quote:
The diocese wouldn’t stand a chance in hell in a civil suit.
This case will not go to a verdict, and no one involved is shooting for that.
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:34 pm to boosiebadazz
That was a public school board case. Is that sufficient for precedence in a private school case? One could argue that a private school or diocese is subject to a higher standard than public school (I’m not trying to talk shite/not a lawyer/but that would be my argument)
Posted on 10/6/20 at 7:39 pm to boosiebadazz
Esquire, have you heard of jury nullification?
The diocese is scared shitless of what the general public thinks about their church.
Agree that there would be zero chance of this getting to a jury trial because the diocese would lose. Always easier to get ND’s on all involved and pay the piso.
The diocese is scared shitless of what the general public thinks about their church.
Agree that there would be zero chance of this getting to a jury trial because the diocese would lose. Always easier to get ND’s on all involved and pay the piso.
Posted on 10/7/20 at 12:29 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
Give me your best argument for constructive notice of this particular act by the kid.
1. You have the school allowing a known disciplinary violator to stay enrolled.
2. You have a dangerous chemical which is probably labeled as poison with the warning of keep away from children.
3. The chemical was apparently stored somewhere where the children could access it.
4. You have kids doing what kids do.
The sum total is a viable theory of failure to protect and supervise children by Diocese employees in loco parentis. It’s good enough to get to a jury.
Posted on 10/7/20 at 12:48 pm to TBoy
No legal knowledge here, but I'd listen to the ND fan on this.
Comes from a private, Catholic institution that puts film guys in high towers with forecasted 60+ mph winds
Comes from a private, Catholic institution that puts film guys in high towers with forecasted 60+ mph winds
Posted on 10/7/20 at 3:13 pm to REB BEER
quote:
The 2nd victim with the burnt arse just made an interception in the jv game.
I guess you could say it lit a fire under his arse.
Page 13 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News