Official Michael Irvin* Sues Marriott for $100 Million

[Cryptical Envelopment]

They do have the right to inform the party that is paying the bill or if he was there with a group and is trespassed from the premises if he was staying on business.

100% correct. It could even be more than a right to inform, even an obligation depending on the Group contract language.

By contractual definition if there is an "incident" (the incident here being that an employee filed a formal complaint against a guest in the Group) involving a guest of the Group, whether it be something like this, or an accident, or if something was stolen from the guest or by the guest, and of course if a guest is trespassed, the primary group contact would be immediately contacted. ALWAYS. Of course the Hotel can still do what it needs to do, trespass, call the police, etc., regardless. Or something can be worked out of it's minor (noise disturbance for example). Or the primary group contact can choose to remove the guest from the Group, whereas the Hotel will trespass the guest.

This is called the "Conduct of Event" section of the group sales agreement.

When you book a hotel room you essentially have a contract, or an agreement with the hotel. But when a Group books a block of rooms, the contract is between the hotel and whomever executed the contract on behalf of the Group. The Group controls, and is responsible for the block. That's how Group contracts work across the industry.

I am not speculating by the way.

 

[SinisterCane]

Se

SWFLHurricaneTitanicInsight

LawandOrderInsight

 

[Angry Ibis]

100% correct. It could even be more than a right to inform, even an obligation depending on the Group contract language.

By contractual definition if there is an "incident" (the incident here being that an employee filed a formal complaint against a guest in the Group) involving a guest of the Group, whether it be something like this, or an accident, or if something was stolen from the guest or by the guest, and of course if a guest is trespassed, the primary group contact would be immediately contacted. ALWAYS. Of course the Hotel can still do what it needs to do, trespass, call the police, etc., regardless. Or something can be worked out of it's minor (noise disturbance for example). Or the primary group contact can choose to remove the guest from the Group, whereas the Hotel will trespass the guest.

This is called the "Conduct of Event" section of the group sales agreement.

When you book a hotel room you essentially have a contract, or an agreement with the hotel. But when a Group books a block of rooms, the contract is between the hotel and whomever executed the contract on behalf of the Group. The Group controls, and is responsible for the block. That's how Group contracts work across the industry.

I am not speculating by the way.

Speculating? We figured you either knew the business or were JW Marriott himself…

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

Speculating? We figured you either knew the business or were JW Marriott himself…

Well, I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I hate to tell you this but if you are traveling on business and staying on a corporate credit card or convention and signed the mini bar and some **** to your room your employer has the right to that info. Moral of the story is always pay for your **** on your own credit card, the dna is probably off limits without a subpoena.

Go **** off with that nonsense, AS THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED. I've never ONCE said anything about what is PAID FOR with a credit card, as anyone with a brain knows that you put down your own personal card for incidentals.

So quit yapping about unrelated tangents that have no bearing on this case, AS THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED.

You just keep harping on this bull**** about the "rights" of the hotel and the "rights" of corporations, which has nothing to do with this situation.

 

[PIPO]

Indeed. I’m having fun. You know your point is reasonable. I know your point is reasonable. But we both know that when there’s more than one way to view something, the CIS way is the only way

What likely happened and she took offense

 

[SFbayCane]

Michael Irvin Shares Footage of His Encounter With Marriott Accuser

YouTube/WFAANational Football League Hall of Famer Michael Irvin on Tuesday fought back against accusations that he sexually harassed a hotel employee in Arizona last month by releasing video footage of their interaction.The former Dallas Cowboys wide receiver, who was staying at the Marriott...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Angry Ibis]

What likely happened and she took offense

Mike was probably asking her where the business center was or the ice machine… or if the gym has a peloton…

He was then slapping himself to get psyched up for a great ride or clearing his inbox…

 

[PIPO]

Mike was probably asking her where the business center was or the ice machine… or if the gym has a peloton…

He was then slapping himself to get psyched up for a great ride or clearing his inbox…

Yeah man.

I believe he likely made an invite and she said no and then she went full cancel culture to get him in trouble and play the victim card because of who he is.

 

[Angry Ibis]

Yeah man.

I believe he likely made an invite and she said no and then she went full cancel culture to get him in trouble and play the victim card because of who he is.

Yep. He was like, so you do have a peloton, we should do a Jess Sims ride, she said no and pulled away and he was like, Mike, Mike, Jess Sims is a runner not a cyclist Mike, you should have said Emma Lovewell… Damnit Mike, everyone loves Emma… idiot

Or the black man thing he’s alleged to have said..

 

[Empirical Cane]

Yeah man.

I believe he likely made an invite and she said no and then she went full cancel culture to get him in trouble and play the victim card because of who he is.

I thought he was just being friendly when he pulled out his crank and ran around the lobby trying to touch everyone with it.

#ItsTheirProblemNotHis

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

100% correct. It could even be more than a right to inform, even an obligation depending on the Group contract language.

By contractual definition if there is an "incident" (the incident here being that an employee filed a formal complaint against a guest in the Group) involving a guest of the Group, whether it be something like this, or an accident, or if something was stolen from the guest or by the guest, and of course if a guest is trespassed, the primary group contact would be immediately contacted. ALWAYS. Of course the Hotel can still do what it needs to do, trespass, call the police, etc., regardless. Or something can be worked out of it's minor (noise disturbance for example). Or the primary group contact can choose to remove the guest from the Group, whereas the Hotel will trespass the guest.

This is called the "Conduct of Event" section of the group sales agreement.

When you book a hotel room you essentially have a contract, or an agreement with the hotel. But when a Group books a block of rooms, the contract is between the hotel and whomever executed the contract on behalf of the Group. The Group controls, and is responsible for the block. That's how Group contracts work across the industry.

I am not speculating by the way.

From @SFbayCane's link above.

"The woman complained to hotel management, and a Marriott operations director reached out to their point of contact at the NFL, as the league had directed the chain to do in instances of alleged misconduct."

 

[AtlAtty]

Yeah man.

I believe he likely made an invite and she said no and then she went full cancel culture to get him in trouble and play the victim card because of who he is.

I agree with most of what you wrote, expect I wonder if her manager (the guy with the vest) was upset with her first for talking to Irvin, and she then made this accusation as a way to deflect the attention from herself.
Let me also add the following. Suppose Irvin did hit on her or compliment her looks. Shouldn’t men and women have the freedom to say those things so long as they don’t physical threaten, or stalk, or do anything beyond hitting on the other person? Are we so sensitive that people can’t even approach each other without upsetting someone’s feelings?
Looks like overreach to me by Marriott and now Irvin is left trying to clean up his reputation.

 

[Empirical Cane]

"...Are we so sensitive that people can’t even approach each other without upsetting someone’s feelings?..."

 

[AlexCane]

I agree with most of what you wrote, expect I wonder if her manager (the guy with the vest) was upset with her first for talking to Irvin, and she then made this accusation as a way to deflect the attention from herself.
Let me also add the following. Suppose Irvin did hit on her or compliment her looks. Shouldn’t men and women have the freedom to say those things so long as they don’t physical threaten, or stalk, or do anything beyond hitting on the other person? Are we so sensitive that people can’t even approach each other without upsetting someone’s feelings?
Looks like overreach to me by Marriott and now Irvin is left trying to clean up his reputation.

Nothing is wrong with flirting. But, reportedly, asking someone whether they've ever had a "big black man inside of her" probably isn't the way we encourage folks to flirt with women.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

I agree with most of what you wrote, expect I wonder if her manager (the guy with the vest) was upset with her first for talking to Irvin, and she then made this accusation as a way to deflect the attention from herself.
Let me also add the following. Suppose Irvin did hit on her or compliment her looks. Shouldn’t men and women have the freedom to say those things so long as they don’t physical threaten, or stalk, or do anything beyond hitting on the other person? Are we so sensitive that people can’t even approach each other without upsetting someone’s feelings?
Looks like overreach to me by Marriott and now Irvin is left trying to clean up his reputation.

Look, from the video tape, nothing can be definitively proven, one way or the other.

So we have to look at likelihoods. The conversation did not look unpleasant, from my perspective I didn’t see any discomfort, that you wouldn’t normally expect in a conversation with strangers, with one person being slightly more friendly than the other.

At no time did the female look intimidated or spooked in anyway, at least the way I saw it, and in fact, her body language and posture exuded confidence and control of the situation, as far as I could tell.

Your explanation is as likely as any other myriad of explanations.

The bottom line is this, what has this resulted in?

It has resulted in Michael Irvin losing employment and exposure opportunities, and his reputation being trashed through national forum, therefore, potentially hurting future employment and income opportunities. If it was you or I, and we committed no foul, no harm, no sexual harassment, how would we feel if we were national figures and our livelihood was at stake?

That’s how I look at the whole situation. The harm to Irvin is much greater right now to him, than it is to that young lady. There’s a lack of proportionality here, even if he was flirting with her, of which I am not convinced.

 

[rsa coral gables]

Nothing is wrong with flirting. But, reportedly, asking someone whether they've ever had a "big black man inside of her" probably isn't the way we encourage folks to flirt with women.

of course not but there is absolutely zero unimpeached evidence that he said that and the burden is on marriott to prove that he said something so outrageous that it warranted calling his employer and let employer know what he said. i think they jumped the gun to say the least.

 

[AlexCane]

Look, from the video tape, nothing can be definitively proven, one way or the other.

So we have to look at likelihoods. The conversation did not look unpleasant, from my perspective I didn’t see any discomfort, that you wouldn’t normally expect in a conversation with strangers, with one person being slightly more friendly than the other.

At no time did the female look intimidated or spooked in anyway, at least the way I saw it, and in fact, her body language and posture exuded confidence and control of the situation, as far as I could tell.

Your explanation is as likely as any other myriad of explanations.

The bottom line is this, what has this resulted in?

It has resulted in Michael Irvin losing employment and exposure opportunities, and his reputation being trashed through national forum, therefore, potentially hurting future employment and income opportunities. If it was you or I, and we committed no foul, no harm, no sexual harassment, how would we feel if we were national figures and our livelihood was at stake?

That’s how I look at the whole situation. The harm to Irvin is much greater right now to him, than it is to that young lady. There’s a lack of proportionality here, even if he was flirting with her, of which I am not convinced.

Except the problem is, that Michael's brilliant legal team have propagated and sensationalized this story and made it a conversation where there likely would be none. Michael's lawyers have probably hurt Mike's reputation more than the Marriot. If not for his brilliant jurists, I doubt any of this ever becomes a story, particularly if they didn't decide to file a lawsuit for . . . /Austin Powers voice/ . . . $100 million dollars. LOL. Not even a dead child, parent or spouse rakes in that cash. I can't take his lawyers seriously. Clowns.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he was off the air for 1 week while it was investigated and then on right after. How was he harmed? Was he even docked pay? Not everything warrants a lawsuit. The better tactic would be to just let it go. The news cycle is violent. We know this. Instead, we get another silly lawsuit.

 

[AlexCane]

of course not but there is absolutely zero unimpeached evidence that he said that and the burden is on marriott to prove that he said something so outrageous that it warranted calling his employer and let employer know what he said. i think they jumped the gun to say the least.

This will get settled. It'll never get to court. But how does it play for Michael when one witness testifies he said that. And then Michael testifies "I don't remember what I said." Those optics are not good. That's why you just let this go. If, on the other hand, Michael was adamant that he said, "xyz" so be it, but he's gonna get on the stand and tell a jury with a straight face "I don't know what I said?" He can't even refute what he said because he doesn't remember. Any good lawyer will fry Michael on cross.

/I still love Mike and if the Hilton asked me to defend them I'd claim conflict lol.

 

[Empirical Cane]

Except the problem is, that Michael's brilliant legal team have propagated and sensationalized this story and made it a conversation where there likely would be none. Michael's lawyers have probably hurt Mike's reputation more than the Marriot. If not for his brilliant jurists, I doubt any of this ever becomes a story, particularly if they didn't decide to file a lawsuit for . . . /Austin Powers voice/ . . . $100 million dollars. LOL. Not even a dead child, parent or spouse rakes in that cash. I can't take his lawyers seriously. Clowns.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he was off the air for 1 week while it was investigated and then on right after. How was he harmed? Was he even docked pay? Not everything warrants a lawsuit. The better tactic would be to just let it go. The news cycle is violent. We know this. Instead, we get another silly lawsuit.

Is there a credible 3rd party (or parties) who were present that have said they can corroborate either person's version of events??