forums

Tears Gator Tears

Number1CanesFan said:
I'm not a lawyer. UF is not named in the lawsuit.

This will be settled out of court and Billy will say he settled to not be a distraction to his team. He'll say he can't talk about it under the terms of the contract. Admitting no wrong, he can't be fired for cause.

If somehow UF got tangled into this and had to pay, but had reason to fire Billy for cause, they'd be saving money even they paid Rashada.
Click to expand...
Does UF need to be named in order for them to take action against Billy?
 
Advertisement
Number1CanesFan said:
I'm not a lawyer. UF is not named in the lawsuit.

This will be settled out of court and Billy will say he settled to not be a distraction to his team. He'll say he can't talk about it under the terms of the contract. Admitting no wrong, he can't be fired for cause.

If somehow UF got tangled into this and had to pay, but had reason to fire Billy for cause, they'd be saving money even they paid Rashada.
Click to expand...

I am a lawyer.

No, you don't need to admit wrong to be fired for cause. You don't even need an actual judgment against you. If either were true were true, hardly anyone would ever be fired for cause.

No, FU does not need to get brought into the lawsuit and pay money in order to claim a termination for cause. Their name is already all over this. They will likely claim reputation harm, damage to the brand, conduct against FU standards, etc....

Ultimately, this will all depend on what's in the contract (which for HCs typically have morals clauses that cover things like committing fraud in the scope of one's job duties).

But remember, you are talking about the same school that fired the shark ****** for cause because he allegedly lied about receiving death threats at a press conference. Assuming Gapier has another terrible season, why wouldn't they fire him for cause for lying to a recruit about benefits provided as an enticement to commit?
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
I am a lawyer.

No, you don't need to admit wrong to be fired for cause. You don't even need an actual judgment against you. If either were true were true, hardly anyone would ever be fired for cause.

No, FU does not need to get brought into the lawsuit and pay money in order to claim a termination for cause. Their name is already all over this. They will likely claim reputation harm, damage to the brand, conduct against FU standards, etc....

Ultimately, this will all depend on what's in the contract (which for HCs typically have morals clauses that cover things like committing fraud in the scope of one's job duties).

But remember, you are talking about the same school that fired the shark ****** for cause because he allegedly lied about receiving death threats at a press conference. Assuming Gapier has another terrible season, why wouldn't they fire him for cause for lying to a recruit about benefits provided as an enticement to commit?
Click to expand...
So is there a burden of proof provision needed? In a he said-he said situation without discovery that results in a settlement, how can one be terminated for cause based on an allegation?
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
I am a lawyer.

No, you don't need to admit wrong to be fired for cause. You don't even need an actual judgment against you. If either were true were true, hardly anyone would ever be fired for cause.

No, FU does not need to get brought into the lawsuit and pay money in order to claim a termination for cause. Their name is already all over this. They will likely claim reputation harm, damage to the brand, conduct against FU standards, etc....

Ultimately, this will all depend on what's in the contract (which for HCs typically have morals clauses that cover things like committing fraud in the scope of one's job duties).

But remember, you are talking about the same school that fired the shark ****** for cause because he allegedly lied about receiving death threats at a press conference. Assuming Gapier has another terrible season, why wouldn't they fire him for cause for lying to a recruit about benefits provided as an enticement to commit?
Click to expand...

I too am not a lawyer but I am wearing a tweed blazer with elbow patches so I concur.
 
TRick72 said:
I too am not a lawyer but I am wearing a tweed blazer with elbow patches so I concur.
Click to expand...
I enjoy the same opinion and delusion.

Self image:
1716563865247.png


Reality:
1716563928810.png
 
CanefaninBuckeyeland said:
So is there a burden of proof provision needed? In a he said-he said situation without discovery that results in a settlement, how can one be terminated for cause based on an allegation?
Click to expand...

That would largely depend on the contract. But, again, this assumption that there needs to be a lawsuit is silly sauce. Florida is an at-will employment state.

Lawsuit concludes via settlement. Employer decides they'd like to "investigate" termination for cause. Employer conducts its own "investigation" of the incident. Now either: (1) Employee fails to comply (usually triggers cause); or (2) Employer finds merit to the allegations (usually triggers cause).

Voila!
 
No_Fly_Zone said:
I am a lawyer.

No, you don't need to admit wrong to be fired for cause. You don't even need an actual judgment against you. If either were true were true, hardly anyone would ever be fired for cause.

No, FU does not need to get brought into the lawsuit and pay money in order to claim a termination for cause. Their name is already all over this. They will likely claim reputation harm, damage to the brand, conduct against FU standards, etc....

Ultimately, this will all depend on what's in the contract (which for HCs typically have morals clauses that cover things like committing fraud in the scope of one's job duties).

But remember, you are talking about the same school that fired the shark ****** for cause because he allegedly lied about receiving death threats at a press conference. Assuming Gapier has another terrible season, why wouldn't they fire him for cause for lying to a recruit about benefits provided as an enticement to commit?
Click to expand...
I understand. Thanks.

If UF fires Billy, I'd think they would have reached some type of settlement as Billy would sue UF if he got nothing and no actual proof of wrong doing. I understand UF would just fire for cause and not pay, but for the $30M-$40M, Billy wouldn't go quietly. I know I wouldn't.
 
RoboCane said:
Does UF need to be named in order for them to take action against Billy?
Click to expand...
Of course not. My wording was confusing. What I was saying is that even if UF wound up paying Rashada for some wild reason, they'd still be saving money by not paying Billy. Obviously, they save even more by not paying Rashada or G5 Billy.

UF is not a named party, but UF could reach out to Rashada's lawyer and say, "We'll pay Billy's $1M alleged promise. Just give us what you have on him."
 
Number1CanesFan said:
I understand. Thanks.

If UF fires Billy, I'd think they would have reached some type of settlement as Billy would sue UF if he got nothing and no actual proof of wrong doing. I understand UF would just fire for cause and not pay, but for the $30M-$40M, Billy wouldn't go quietly. I know I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Assuming FU ends up trying to fire Billy at year's end, and assuming nothing crazy (in either party's favor) comes out in the lawsuit, chances are they settle on a number well below the buyout amount but way above zero.

If neither side is ultimately happy with the number, it's probably a good settlement.
 
Advertisement
daherms said:
the on3 podcast discussing the Rashada incident all but put the blame on UM and Ruiz. Specifically, singled out Ruiz with his loud tweets and welcoming players through lifewallet as the reason for the Rashada incident, not that it was mismanaged on the end of Hathcock or the Gator Collective. Completely absurd.
Click to expand...
Has nothing to do with them lying to him to get him to flip 😂
 
Advertisement
Number1CanesFan said:
I understand. Thanks.

If UF fires Billy, I'd think they would have reached some type of settlement as Billy would sue UF if he got nothing and no actual proof of wrong doing. I understand UF would just fire for cause and not pay, but for the $30M-$40M, Billy wouldn't go quietly. I know I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

Isn't there a US Code Title 15, Book 14(c), Chapter 47(3) (b) Paragraph 88(e) Line 42Y (19) (b) or maybe in another law dog regulation that stipulates the penalty for "Impersonating a Real Football Coach"?

And the penalty is a 20-whack beating with a bamboo stick - or was that the penalty for littering? In the Philippines.

And yes, I'm not a lawyer.
 
UMFarArcher said:
Isn't there a US Code Title 15, Book 14(c), Chapter 47(3) (b) Paragraph 88(e) Line 42Y (19) (b) or maybe in another law dog regulation that stipulates the penalty for "Impersonating a Real Football Coach"?

And the penalty is a 20-whack beating with a bamboo stick - or was that the penalty for littering? In the Philippines.

And yes, I'm not a lawyer.
Click to expand...

Singapore, for sure.
 
Back
Top