Nikki Moody sues Bill Fennelly over Racial Discrimination...

[NWICY]

Let it go to court, I'm tired of people getting easy money for sueing over perceived wrongs. The attitude of let's sue they'll settle is way to prevalent, anymore.

 

[Tornado man]

I've heard a few things. How about you?

I didn't think so...

 

[KnappShack]

Some quick, general takes from the legal perspective -

- Fielder and Timmer is an excellent law firm. Quite possibly the best in the state at what they do. That doesn't mean that this case is good or bad, but Nikki will have as good of representation as possible. Also, they are likely getting paid on a contingency or % basis which means they think there is a good enough chance to get paid here that they are willing to risk not getting paid at all.

- The right to sue or ability to sue letter from the Civil Right Commission is standard fare and should not be interpreted as a validation of any claims.

- While it's of course about money, I doubt that either Nikki or her attorneys thought there was any realistic possibility that a settlement would occur without a lawsuit being filed, depositions being taken and, potentially a full trial. This isn't about getting a bluff called or thinking they could just write a couple of letters and get paid. Again, doesn't mean they're right, but don't think that they expected to get any sort of offer at this point. When the attorney signed on, they did it for the long haul.

- These types of cases are tough in general. To show that you were treated differently, because of race, and that that treatment lead to _______ in damages rather than something else is a tough mountain to climb. But again, this isn't a bad law firm and they've obviously thought of that and they're going to have more evidence than just Nikki going up there and saying what is written in the lawsuit.

You can offer mediation within the ICRC without being compelled to participate. I have been involved in cases where it is clear that mediation is going to go nowhere but counsel recommends participating anyway.

Also, people have mentioned that the fact that this law firm took the case means it has legs. I imagine as soon as Moody mentioned a conversation with the University President's spouse that was characterized as sympathetic they saw dollar signs. In addition, knowledge of the University's propensity to settle even relatively strong cases to avoid the risks and publicity of going to trial may sway a good law firm to take a weak case. The goal isn't to win a trial - the goal is to get money out of the defendant for the plaintiff. It is often a game of chicken to see for how much you can get a nervous defendant to settle.

I'm not saying they don't have much more, but we can't draw conclusions simply off of who the representation is.

The law firm taking the case sounds like the OJ Dream Team. A group of guys who's careers weren't all that successful in court, but since they were the "Dream Team" and the best money can buy their case must be strong.

I don't know if the case is strong or not, but my decision won't be based on the law firm simply taking the case

 

[jbhtexas]

Some limited experience with the process led me to my remarks about the mediation process. I must have missed that ISU requested mediation. I thought it was Moody et al who requested it, but I may have misread something?

I was going off the ICRC link, which as I interpreted it, the mediation is offered by ICRC. I was assuming that ISU could have refused, but maybe that is not right.

 

[ribsnwhiskey]

I didn't think so...

Do you know what Niki is doing these days down in Texas? I didn't think so...

 

[isufbcurt]

Do you know what Niki is doing these days down in Texas? I didn't think so...

Suing people. See I'm an insider lol

 

[LindenCy]

Better Call Saul.

"You don't need a criminal lawyer. You need a criminal...lawyer."

 

[Ms3r4ISU]

The law firm taking the case sounds like the OJ Dream Team. A group of guys who's careers weren't all that successful in court, but since they were the "Dream Team" and the best money can buy their case must be strong.

I don't know if the case is strong or not, but my decision won't be based on the law firm simply taking the case

So you're on the jury?

 

[KnappShack]

So you're on the jury?

As if we don't have the court of public opinion. I reference this thread if you need proof

 

[gizzsdad]

The attitude of let's sue they'll settle is way to prevalent, anymore.

True. Unfortunately, this is usually driven by insurance companies, on the basis of it being cheaper to settle than to have a prolonged litigation. Many times defendants who want to fight are "encouraged" to settle in order to save money.

Not sure in this case if a loss would mean an insurance company paying, or the University/tax payers.

 

[HardcoreClone]

You can offer mediation within the ICRC without being compelled to participate. I have been involved in cases where it is clear that mediation is going to go nowhere but counsel recommends participating anyway.

Also, people have mentioned that the fact that this law firm took the case means it has legs. I imagine as soon as Moody mentioned a conversation with the University President's spouse that was characterized as sympathetic they saw dollar signs. In addition, knowledge of the University's propensity to settle even relatively strong cases to avoid the risks and publicity of going to trial may sway a good law firm to take a weak case. The goal isn't to win a trial - the goal is to get money out of the defendant for the plaintiff. It is often a game of chicken to see for how much you can get a nervous defendant to settle.

I'm not saying they don't have much more, but we can't draw conclusions simply off of who the representation is.

So it sounds like Moody really has nothing to lose? Make some accusations, file a suit, and see if she can be compensated. Let's say Fennelly/ISU are cleared of everything, what are the chances they could then go after Moody for some sort of defamation? That really is the only way I could see Moody being "punished" if these accusations are unfounded. Otherwise, it's still Bill and the university who were dragged through the mud publicly. If Moody is the type of person many have said she is, then I doubt she really cares about her dirty laundry being aired in this case.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

I was going off the ICRC link, which as I interpreted it, the mediation is offered by ICRC. I was assuming that ISU could have refused, but maybe that is not right.

Not refusing is a little different than actively requesting. As for agreeing to mediation, I don't see where the downside to that would be for ISU. I may be a little off on my interpretations, but mediation is simply a process where a neutral party sits down with the two opposing parties, and facilitates discussion/negotiation with an eye toward resolution that is satisfactory to both parties. If that resolution doesn't happen, at the very least ISU has a clear picture of the mindset of the Moody faction...and they look good for at least sitting down & talking to her.

 

[CY9008]

Is Moody still engaged/married to Jeremy Reeves?

 

[Gunnerclone]

Is Moody still engaged/married to Jeremy Reeves?

Superman?

 

[isufbcurt]

Not refusing is a little different than actively requesting. As for agreeing to mediation, I don't see where the downside to that would be for ISU. I may be a little off on my interpretations, but mediation is simply a process where a neutral party sits down with the two opposing parties, and facilitates discussion/negotiation with an eye toward resolution that is satisfactory to both parties. If that resolution doesn't happen, at the very least ISU has a clear picture of the mindset of the Moody faction...and they look good for at least sitting down & talking to her.

Also, by agreeing to mediation ISU gets to see the case Moody has against them and can get a jump start on the trial. I could see agreeing to mediation just to see what they have with no real intent on settling in mediation.

 

[BCClone]

Not refusing is a little different than actively requesting. As for agreeing to mediation, I don't see where the downside to that would be for ISU. I may be a little off on my interpretations, but mediation is simply a process where a neutral party sits down with the two opposing parties, and facilitates discussion/negotiation with an eye toward resolution that is satisfactory to both parties. If that resolution doesn't happen, at the very least ISU has a clear picture of the mindset of the Moody faction...and they look good for at least sitting down & talking to her.

Mediation is highly encouraged in the court system. Especially in more emotional type lawsuits. I've been in one. Basically like you describe, but everything is lawyered up. If heels are dug in, it's more a formality between lawyers and a who blinks first type thing. The mediation process can scare people into a settlement.

 

[LawyerClone]

Let it go to court, I'm tired of people getting easy money for sueing over perceived wrongs. The attitude of let's sue they'll settle is way to prevalent, anymore.

I strongly disagree with this, but it'll derail the thread. Instead, I'll use it as an excuse to link to a clip to a great movie and ask everyone to advance to the 1:18 mark.

[video=youtube;CCZrf_BPkB8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCZrf_BPkB8&t=1m18s[/video]

 

[Royalclone]

If what she claims can be proven, it is likely in ISU's best interest to let BF go. If the claims she makes about telling assistant coaches and administrators about the problem, and nothing was done........ISU has a problem. The question I have is why did it take over a year after she left for her to decide to take this action? If it was that serious, why not file the complaint as soon as her senior season ended, or right after she was cut from the WNBA at least? That seems a little strange to me to wait that long.

No matter what, with the media attention, this is going to taint the program.

I'm pretty sure they started building their suit about a year ago. Her attorney was already calling around looking for players to join in the suit or at least be witnesses. Ironically, one of those he called looking for support was the player she bullied.

I agree that things will never be the same with ISU WBB as long as BF is at the helm. Even if he is completely innocent of racial discrimination, which I have reason to believe is the case, it will be a tough row to hoe in such a publicly scrutinized position in student athletics. It's ashamed that our judicial system allows the accuser to ruin the career of the accused no matter the outcome. In fact, with little or no means of retribution for bogus claims. The University will likely choose to cuts its losses as the potential risk/reward is almost never high enough to justify going through it all. The only ones happy in the end are the lawyers.

 

[IlliniCy]

That's unfortunately will be the sad part of this. But I think ISU takes a good stance because this involves a lot: reputations of BF, his coaches and AD and the university. If ISU win this case, I hope they take the offensive to clear BF's name.

one thing that popped up my mind: will ISU erase her name from the record books and WNBA draftees wall?

As much as I personally would love to see it happen, you absolutely DON'T remove her from anything. Even after it's all over. Take the high road.

 

[NWICY]

I strongly disagree with this, but it'll derail the thread. Instead, I'll use it as an excuse to link to a clip to a great movie and ask everyone to advance to the 1:18 mark.

[video=youtube;CCZrf_BPkB8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCZrf_BPkB8&t=1m18s[/video]

Ambulance chaser. Clip is really funny I've never seen that movie, I'll try to find it and watch it. Like the way the one dude carries our whatever he took from the cooler right out the door with him.