Skip to comments.Judge: Dan Rather Can Again Pursue Fraud Claim In CBS Suit
Posted on 07/22/2009 4:22:22 PM PDT by mojito
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--A state judge on Tuesday reinstated a fraud claim by former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather in a $70 million lawsuit against CBS Corp. (CBS).
At a hearing Tuesday, New York State Supreme Court Justice Ira Gammerman ruled that Rather could file an amended complaint in the case that alleges fraud by CBS. The judge had previously thrown out the fraud claim.
"The reasonable, objective analysis is it was a bad day at Black Rock," said Rather, referring to CBS's headquarters in midtown Manhattan.
Rather also has alleged breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty by CBS.
Jim Quinn, a lawyer for CBS, said the media company will ask for the fraud claim to be dismissed.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I thought Rather was the guy engaged in fraud? How can he sue himself?
I see no downside in this fight. It’s like watching two fire ants in a death match. Who cares which one wins, just enjoy the fight knowing that both are spending huge sums of money. The American people are the winners.
That’s exactly it! Bring on the popcorn!
He'll just type one up - fake but accurate.
>>Its like watching two fire ants in a death match. <<
I just can’t figure out which one is Rather.
He was having a bad air day?
Yeah, I'm kinda confused too. Is he accusing CBS of giving him a fraud story to report? If he was just reading a script that the network gave him to report, I can see where he might have a case. If his job was to report what CBS told him to say, why should they fire him when it backfired?
Could we possibly never hear the name Dan Rather again?
Just so. CBS's dose of herpes given to the nation. "Bad day at Black Rock," you betcha, a&&hole.
The only reason Dan Rather isn't in jail is because George Bush is a nice guy. The falsified National Guard records were accepted and presented by him as authentic. Falsification of government records is a felony. Rather, as the presenter of these documents, assured us they were real. If this had gone to court, Rather would have been required to reveal the source of those documents. Contrary to what the press claims, the first amendment does not prevent the press from being subpoenaed to reveal sources. Even if it did, once the documents were proven fake, the reporter-client confidentiality would not have been a legitimate defense, as no actual information was transmitted. If Bush had insisted these false documents be investigated, both Rather and CBS would have become embroiled in the perpetration of a Federal felony.