Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RexBeach

Meaningless except that Trump is sueing the first girl who (apparently) told the truth about this.


7 posted on 06/13/2012 8:05:44 AM PDT by RightOnTheBorder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: RightOnTheBorder

On what basis? Contractual limitation on what she could say? But contracts are two-sided things. If the game was rigged, the other side may have breached first, releasing her from her side of the contract, in part or in full, depending on how its written.


58 posted on 06/13/2012 11:05:47 AM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: RightOnTheBorder

Ignore my previous post. The cause of action appears to be defamation, not contract. That would also seem to be an empty threat. Truth is an absolute defense, and a “tie” (ambiguity about what the truth is) usually goes to free speech, especially when dealing with public entities. Defamation suits are notoriously difficult to win. IMHO, they’re probably just trying to bully her.


59 posted on 06/13/2012 11:05:53 AM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson