forums

Official Michael Irvin* Sues Marriott for $100 Million

rsa coral gables

rsa coral gables

Malentendido
Premium
Joined
Jul 21, 2012
Messages
7,187
saw this earlier today. On the Saturday night before the Superbowl (which is played on Sunday), the NFL Network removed Michael Irvin aka Michael Irving from their broadcast because Marriott told the NFL Network that Irvin had done something to a female Marriott employee. Irvin said that he had a brief encounter/encounter with the female employee after coming back to the hotel late Saturday from partying. Irvin alleges he has a few witnesses that witnessed the very brief encounter/conversation. he's suing for $100 million and is demanding to know the identify of the employee. i hope he wins.

www.cbssports.com

Michael Irvin files $100 million lawsuit against hotel chain, accuser after alleged misconduct incident

Irvin says he isn't sure what he did wrong: 'Honestly, I'm a bit baffled with it all'
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
 
Advertisement
Interesting. $100M? Nah. Still, while I applaud Marriott for supporting an employee they needed more information, or release more. Maybe the NFL Network has the details.

I’m not sure what complaint could be made unless Michael said something crude or threatening. And the video shows the brief conversation.

Weird.
 
TemplarCane said:
Interesting. $100M? Nah. Still, while I applaud Marriott for supporting an employee they needed more information. I’m not sure what complaint could be made unless Michael said something crude or threatening. And the video shows the brief conversation.

Weird.
Click to expand...
even if he said something crude or disgusting, Marriott had no right to call the NFL to tell them he said something crude. they could have thrown him out of the hotel (they actually did throw him out) but calling his employer?? hope. if he threatened her, that's another question.
 
Guessing Mike is suing for defamation because he didn't lose his job...although due to them sitting him the next day, one could argue that he may not be considered for certain future assignments due to the alleged complaint. CIS Attorneys/Lawyers can explain it better than I can....

Playmaker most likely saw something fine..complimented her and tried to make a move, she declined...Marriott made a big deal out of it because the employee probably felt "disrespected" and thus called the NFL Network POC who handles rooming etc...they moved Mike to another hotel and to protect their image, decided to sit Mike the next day until they got all the facts....which they eventually got and he subsequently returned to work/on air.
 
TAKE'EM FOR EVERY PENNY YOU CAN, PLAYMAKER.

Mixed Martial Arts Sport GIF by UFC
 
Advertisement
CaneThang2020 said:
Guessing Mike is suing for defamation because he didn't lose his job...although due to them sitting him the next day, one could argue that he may not be considered for certain future assignments due to the alleged complaint. CIS Attorneys/Lawyers can explain it better than I can....

Playmaker most likely saw something fine..complimented her and tried to make a move, she declined...Marriott made a big deal out of it because the employee probably felt "disrespected" and thus called the NFL Network POC who handles rooming etc...they moved Mike to another hotel and to protect their image, decided to sit Mike the next day until they got all the facts....which they eventually got and he subsequently returned to work/on air.
Click to expand...
just reviewed the complaint. defamation and tortious interference with business relationship.
 
rsa coral gables said:
even if he said something crude or disgusting, Marriott had no right to call the NFL to tell them he said something crude. they could have thrown him out of the hotel (they actually did throw him out) but calling his employer?? hope. if he threatened her, that's another question.
Click to expand...
I’m not an attorney so I don’t know Marriott’s rights or obligations. If the NFL Network picking up the tab and Michael was told to leave, wouldn’t they ask why? If so, what should Marriott’s response have been? Is there privacy law you can state is in effect here?

And I don’t what to get into what Michael allegedly could have said to be construed as misconduct. All we know is Michael had been out drinking, and he and the employee had a brief conversation.

And Michael was pulled off the air on Tuesday of Super Bowl Week, not the night before the game.

Let’s see how the case unfolds.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Tad Footeball said:
You'd be surprised at the amount of cameras in your average hotel so there almost certainly is video evidence of the entire encounter.
Click to expand...
irvin has already filed a motion to obtain the accuser's name and to obtain all photo and video evidence from the hotel. also, according to a dallas newspaper article, there are half a dozen fans that saw the entire exchange and have some of it on video. i hope michael is right and that he fleeces the fccckkkinggg hotel.
 
Advertisement
Tad Footeball said:
Not that I've ever seen. I think you run into legal issues (at least in this country) if you start surveiling audio too- even in "public" spaces of private property.
Click to expand...
privacy is generally gauged against an expectation of privacy. once you walk out of your house and are walking around a hotel lobby, you don't really have an expectation of privacy so you can be recorded, including audio taped
 
rsa coral gables said:
privacy is generally gauged against an expectation of privacy. once you walk out of your house and are walking around a hotel lobby, you don't really have an expectation of privacy so you can be recorded, including audio taped
Click to expand...
And why many public places on private property will post signs the area is under video surveillance.

That said, separating audio to specific people in area like a hotel lobby is probably difficult without considerable expense.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top