Making a buck cleaning Lester's spittle trays on Sequels' 22-year old supermodel abs

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Oh, please. As my torts professor used to say, in the normal every day life, shit happens. Ok, she didn't put it exactly that way, but pretty close.

Let's recap. He's embarassed. I can't blame him for being pissed at her for letting the cat out of the bag (though it didn't seem to bother him when all of the other staffers knew that they were an item). But asking a jury for money damages because his feelings were hurt when he and the world found out via her blog that she had relationships with five other people when they were playing Headmaster and Naughty Schoolgirl?

Sounds like someone's a bit jealous. The Mrs. still has that No Banging The Office Slut policy in place?

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Most blogs have very small readership.

Capitol Hill is a very small community, and the young staffers all talk.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
Capitol Hill is a very small community, and the young staffers all talk.

Mutist fucks!

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
Capitol Hill is a very small community, and the young staffers all talk.

Right, so what's the difference between her telling everyone at lunch abuot the spankings the next day live and in person than on her blog?

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Isn't "well-known tramp" redundant?

TM

If a woman has many sexual partners but none of them knows about the others, does she make any noise?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Right, so what's the difference between her telling everyone at lunch abuot the spankings the next day live and in person than on her blog?

I never got to go to her lunches.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
He wants revenge, and I don't think it's because his feewing were huwt. Given how harshly a jury would likely view her, he has a chance, if he can get it past a judge. Of course, having conceded that everything she said is true may make that difficult.

I disagree again. I see this guy with a decent shot at getting a big fat zero. What are his damages? He didn't lose his job, did he?How likely is a DC jury to feel sympathy for a (presumably white) secret-spanking Republican lawyer in a fairly high-ranking position?

But I don't think it will get past a motion to dismiss. Granted, I don't know diddly about tort claims in DC, but he wouldn't have a shot at stating a valid claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress or invasion of privacy around here. There's some real bad case law with bizarro and really horrific fact patterns (bad as in people dying, not bad as in being outed as the one of five boyfriends who can't come with a condom) where those claims get booted as a matter of law.

If I were her lawyer, I'd counterclaim for sexual harassment. One of her bosses set her up with this guy who is her superior, she has a relationship with him, and then gets fired when it becomes public. That one will get past the motion to dismiss stage.

This dude is stupid. If he were in private practice, he would perhaps remember the reason why lawyers tend not to sue clients on unpaid legal bills . . .

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Google says her:



TM

Did she have her hips removed and put into the funbags? That wouldnt be so awful looking if she had some hips to balance it out. How does she not do a faceplant everytime she stands up?

She is pretty but for the collagen ducklips. At least she kept her original nose- gives the face some character.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
If a woman has many sexual partners but none of them knows about the others, does she make any noise?

If you have many sexual partners, but no real relationships (mind you I don't know how many of her sexual partners thought they were in a genuine relationship with her or if they were just taggin' that ass), then I guarantee they're talkin'. Well, when they look like her, they are. When they look like Monica Lewinsky, not so much.

TM

[bilmore]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
If a woman has many sexual partners but none of them knows about the others, does she make any noise?

I like how you tied all of this back in with the orgasm posts.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Right, so what's the difference between her telling everyone at lunch abuot the spankings the next day live and in person than on her blog?

I think the difference is that word gets around about the blog so anyone who hears about it and has internet access can go to the direct source; rather than if she had told a bunch of friends, and they told their friends, and so on. It makes the gossip more accessible. It's the difference between her merely telling everyone at lunch, versus her telling everyone at lunch, videotaping it, and playing it in the capitol rotunda, and then wonkette's getting a hold of it, and playing it on cnn.

This may not go to the legal merits, just to the reasonable expectation of dissemination (ha!).

I really don't believe that she intended her blog to have a limited readership, but I am inclined to think poorly of her.

ETA that I would be concerned about the precedent it would set if he won, so it should probably be dismissed.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
FWIW, I never sued that Maude Lebowski wannabe - and my damages have been incalcuable.

Her PMing people about how you're hung like a mushroom is not "publication." Besides, we're all authorized recipients of the information.

Dismissed, with costs.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
Sounds like someone's a bit jealous. The Mrs. still has that No Banging The Office Slut policy in place?

Worse than that. She has a No Hiring An Office Slut policy in place. NB&A employees are all either guys or look like my grandmother.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
If a woman has many sexual partners but none of them knows about the others, does she make any noise?

Sure. For an extra $50 per session.

Originally posted by robustpuppy
The Charlie effect?

More like the Bayesdow effect. Not everyone was privvy to the body stubble. Who wants to trap that?