Anderson and Demeo's Lawsuit updates?
- Thread starter njfan
- Start date
Monte's buddy Sexton
Here is a thought. David Jones and Andre Curbelo maybe having some trouble landing somewhere because they would require a waiver to play immediately.
Assuming they both eventually land at a school and then assume they get the waiver. Could that help SJU in their "for cause" claim against Mike Anderson? Whatever they use in their application to try to get a waiver will almost certainly reflect poorly on what happened last year at SJU.
Just a thought.
Assuming they both eventually land at a school and then assume they get the waiver. Could that help SJU in their "for cause" claim against Mike Anderson? Whatever they use in their application to try to get a waiver will almost certainly reflect poorly on what happened last year at SJU.
Just a thought.
Yes, it says he is suing the university and his lawyer told him he had to show up at graduation.
L J S A
Well-known member
You actually believe that?
Be careful giving anyone a pass.
With all the Repole talk, the chairman of the BOT , Bill J., has a brilliant business mind, who as CFO of KKR was a driving force in building it to a $400 billion behemoth. He is very active in his role and has been incredibly generous to the AD and university as a whole. Still waiting for Repole to pour some of his promised investment into NIL. He could be a huge boost if he follows through. In the meantime Bill is doing great things.
Last edited:
Joe Oliva.
Pitino did comment the other night that Joe Oliva was tough to deal with in consummating his contract. I'd imagine the severance and other clauses protect the university better than the previous extension. Lessons learned i guess.
It's a fact that Repole has not participated in NIL yet?
That's the word from multiple reliable sources. Considering how he shoots from the lip could have helped retain some of the younger player(s) who left for greener ($$) pastures.
In his defense he could be forming his own collective or waiting for charitable status to be granted to sju collectives. But also fair to point out several larger donors have jumped in without it being a charitable deduction.
I'm not so sure that Oliva has provided the best advice to the University over the years. As a practicing corporate and commercial attorney for 45 years, that's just my opinion. Pitino's comment aside.Joe Oliva.
Pitino did comment the other night that Joe Oliva was tough to deal with in consummating his contract. I'd imagine the severance and other clauses protect the university better than the previous extension. Lessons learned i guess.
Your family member did very well in this case. There must have been some interesting undying facts is all I can say. Most times the carrot of a "package" is enough to get the ex employee to sign a Release and organizations don't often enhance these Packages unless they see something bad in their firing. The risk to the employee is don't sign the Release and walk away with zip, most employees don't have the guts to make that call.
Beast, no one puts "non-binding" arbitration clauses into these contracts. If non-binding it is a waste of everyone's time and money, e.g., "I don't like the results I'll reject it and just go into Court". The "binding" nature of these clauses in employment contracts (especially in the securities industry, among others) favors the Employer because many times arbitrators are business people who are not swayed by emotion, sympathy factors and non-facts.
It's been litigated exhaustively and by in large, exclusive remedies being "binding" arbitration is highly encouraged by the courts. Keeps the courts dockets lighter and it follows what the parties intended and so why should the court step into a dispute that laid out the procedural remedy as binding arbitration.
Courts only do so if the arbitration is rigged or grossly and manifestly flawed, 99% of the times, courts uphold the arbitration decision.
no trial--- Binding Arbitration.
My experience in arbitration has not been in regards to employment contracts but over a termination dispute claiming bias. That arbitration was non binding, with the next step being trial if sides could not agree.
I yield to what appears to be professional knowledge on your part as that's out of my scope of knowledge.
Binding arbitration does seem dangerous for either side because in effect it becomes a judge and jury of one.
Thank you for weighing in! Good to see you at BET
I yield to what appears to be professional knowledge on your part as that's out of my scope of knowledge.
Binding arbitration does seem dangerous for either side because in effect it becomes a judge and jury of one.
Thank you for weighing in! Good to see you at BET
Prediction: this stays pretty quiet with non-disclosure and confidentiality requirements., and frankly, does the media at large really care that much about a money fight like this?
Mike's team probably asked for the full payout during that "phone call", and the School reciprocated with "for cause" and half, thus Mike's side was "insulted". Mike settles for 75% plus the school pays his legal fees and mutual non-disparagement clauses and then this all goes away, hopefully sooner rather than later.
Mike's team probably asked for the full payout during that "phone call", and the School reciprocated with "for cause" and half, thus Mike's side was "insulted". Mike settles for 75% plus the school pays his legal fees and mutual non-disparagement clauses and then this all goes away, hopefully sooner rather than later.
S.: Great to see you at the BET and hope to see you again and spend some time with you, we had a good time chatting.
Non-employment contracts such as commercial contracts of all kinds often have a hierarchy of dispute resolution: 1. senior management on each side try to resolve for 30 days; 2. non-binding mediation next for 60 days, 3. if both efforts fail either party can go to Court. Most commercial contracts waive Juries even if the case goes to Court because of the runaway jury notion.
Always very pleased to discover just how smart our alums are. I have some great attorneys (one sju law review, another a harvard law guy) but on redmen alone there are some terrific ones as well.
Does that mean you come here to read posts to discover how smart-a**ed our alums are (such as myself)?
Last edited:
Learned a lot from the experience.
Especially the fact that if you are over 40, you are considered a protected class and have 21 days to consider a severance package, 45 days if it's part of a group layoff.
Will have that in the back of my head if/when the corporate executioner comes for me.
And yes there was something bad in the firing, but not enough to go to war over. We'll take the skirmish and the small victory.