Poll: Is UT being extorted?

[MKEvol]

Are the demands extortion?

This is really a grey area of the law: whether settlement demand letters are extortion/blackmail or merely using leverage to gain an edge in a settlement negotiation. Truthfully, a lot of lawyers walk up to the line. In this case, it would really depend on what the letter specifically says.

First, extortion and blackmail are different legal concepts. Extortion is the use of physical threat or coercion for some benefit. Blackmail is a threat to release sensitive information unless someone gives you money/some benefit. Closely related, but not the same. So this is definitely not extortion. But it could be blackmail.

It is always illegal to threaten to press criminal charges unless some demand is met. It is almost never illegal to threaten to litigate a claim if a settlement isn't reached.

If the letter says "pay me/my client X or I'll release this damaging information," it would likely be blackmail. But, "unless you pay my client X, I will be forced to litigate this and there is a likelihood that damaging information about you will come out," is likely not.

Not the definitive answer you are probably looking for...but then, the answer in most legal cases is "it depends."

 

[MT_Vol]

Not sure what the terms of Pruitts contract is, but if he feels he legally has the right to the money he may be trying to give Tennessee full warning. Either give him what he is due and settle outside of court or he will go to court and get it that route, which may or may not entail having to disclose other information.

He was fired for cause. Cornbread will get nothing and like it.

 

[Special Ed]

If UT is being extorted, then someone will be prosecuted because extortion is a criminal offense - usually classed as a felony.
That means prison time.

 

[dduncan4163]

Pruitt is a real POS. Kiffin can't hold a candle to him. He is akking sure that he'll never gig another big boy DC gig again.

 

[DiderotsGhost]

If Pruitt really had something, his lawyer would've communicated it privately, and there would've been a settlement. All this loud, public "WE'RE GOING TO OUT YOU!" stuff is desperation.

The letter doesn't even make sense. How would Rick Barnes, Willie Martinez, or Butch Jones have anything to do with Pruitt's case? Why would the courts allow him to have records on completely unrelated coaches? His bluff is getting called, because it's stupid.

He's never going to get a job again if he continues with this crap. Even Saban didn't re-hire him after he got fired.

 

[Tnman1]

Pruitt needs to be deposed, to see where all this cheating came from, Bama, UGA, or FSU? Answer the question Jeremy.

 

[VolArmy74]

In Avenatti's case he threatened to go public and expose Nike for being a part of the college basketball cheating scandal because a coach supposedly made those claims to him. He said he'd go public and hurt Nike's stock prices/company value if he didn't get a 25 million dollar windfall from them.

Pruitt's lawyer in this case threatened to cripple the UTAD up by going public that UT was mired in a vast AD wide cheating scandal based on the word of a former coach, unless of course they ponied up millions of dollars.

I honestly can't see how this is any different than what Avenatti did.

 

[supersmo18]

Right. Don't know the circumstances.....but, I am guessing this ex-employee threatened a suit while claiming being unjustly terminated....?

This sounds different....there is no denial of wrong doing....just the threat of exposing UT is no money paid....

Very similar, except this guy quit and wasn’t fired. He claimed he had all kinds of dirt on the business that he would turn in on them if they didn’t pay up, and it’s a pretty big business. However, they didn’t do anything wrong, and the guy quit out of just being angry that he wasn’t appreciated by his colleagues (he’s a major dick anyway, I know him too, just didn’t work with him). So they just cut down his proposed settlement by like 80% and he took it and ran. Game over. So in the comparison of this situation to UT’s, it’s similar on that someone is no longer employed, felt like they should be but for whatever the circumstances, they aren’t, and are owed a lot of compensation for it. So, you make threats with the help of a lawyer to get cash.

 

[OLEVOLFAN]

I would give him a 6 Peice chicken Mcnugget and call it done!

 

[swampfoxfan]

It would shock/matter to nobody to learn there is cheating going on in college football. Now with NIL it just doesn't matter, let Mr Jerk say whatever he wants. UT should not honor Pruitt with a response unless it is in court.

 

[tbones0711]

Give me money

Or I will say …………

Sounds like extortion/blackmail to me.

1st thought...best thought. When reading of this yesterday the first thing that came to mind was blackmail. Not a good way to go about things in a legal/professional manner, imo. Sort of threatening also. Not a good way to go about getting anything. If it was poker I'd call the bluff. Pruitt going to court and testifying is going to damage his image beyond repair. UT has already suffered because of his actions so a little more weight isn't gonna hurt. Plus his legal team is gonna have to put other professionals on the spot and risk damaging their careers which is doubtful.

And beyond that, an incident occurred at Fla. St. involving him and a female coed that doesn't need digging up. This matter just reeks of foolishness bordering on desperation. Better to just move along.

 

[barknoxbrawler]

He was fired for cause

Of course he was says the university. He thinks not and honestly, I don’t trust the UT administration enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[tbones0711]

Where's lawgator and our other attorneys?

Working on the details of Mullins' buy-out. Heard he's moving to Louisiana.

 

[NighthawkVol]

Doesn't sound like they are denying that he cheated. They aren't asking for "damages". They are basically saying pay us or else.....

This. They would also need to show how their claims that Tennessee’s entire athletics department is cheating is relevant to Pruitt’s claim. That’s a stretch. Maybe arbitrary enforcement of contracts? Even then, there’s a lot to prove and prove doesn’t include hearsay.

 

[OrangeSoddyDaisy]

Not a lawyer but my understanding is that if you fire with cause, you may have to show cause. This is where the lawyers on his side say, "Well, prove it". Proof gets difficult and sometimes gets all tangled up in facts. Nobody likes facts, pisses them off.

If he'd been fired 'without cause', UT could "just 'cuz, all ye need to know" and he'd have no leg to stand on. Have to be careful though...if they said "just 'cuz you smelled a little funny" or "cuz of the cornbread", then the lawyers would say:

Smelled funny to whom?
Define a little?
Is funny necessarily bad?
Who did the smelling?
Can you clarify if it is or isn't corn light bread?
Have you considered whether the term cornbread might actually be a metophor?

 

[TennesseeTarheel]

So, discovery goes both ways. How might Pruitt's previous schools be affected?
What does Saban have to say, hmmmm?

 

[OrangeVolMan]

What Is Extortion?
Extortion is the wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or intimidation to gain money or property from an individual or entity. Extortion generally involves a threat being made to the victim’s person or property, or to their family or friends.

While the threat of violence or property damage is commonplace in extortion, it can also involve reputational harm or unfavorable government action.

 

[VolinMichigan]

I think people lean on other people and threaten suits to try and get what they want or what they think they're entitled to. I don't think this fits the legal definition of extortion. If this was serious, he would have just filed suit and let UT know via a filing what he's alleging and not publicly put out a statement. It was opportune timing after UT is in the national headlines for the Ole Miss game. Kick them while they're down to see if they'll pay to make them go away.

 

[OrangeTsar]

I say no only because, in a court of law, it's legal to threaten someone or entities for money.

Yup, if the mob does it, it’s extortion. But once you pass the bar, it becomes advocacy for a client. Beautiful arrangement, no?

 

[savannahfan]

Obviously that isn’t as clear cut as it seems. Because if he was truly fired for cause, and it was rock solid, then this stuff wouldn’t be happening.

But is this extortion? No. It is extreme desperation though. And I find it hard to believe that Pruitts lawyer has been able to get a ton of sensitive information this quickly going back that far.

I disagree with this part of what you say. You can find a lawyer that will sue over this, or even motherhood! Makes no difference of guilt, only if lying or distorting has a chance for a court verdict in their client's (and their) favor.

 

[savannahfan]

This is really a grey area of the law: whether settlement demand letters are extortion/blackmail or merely using leverage to gain an edge in a settlement negotiation. Truthfully, a lot of lawyers walk up to the line. In this case, it would really depend on what the letter specifically says.

First, extortion and blackmail are different legal concepts. Extortion is the use of physical threat or coercion for some benefit. Blackmail is a threat to release sensitive information unless someone gives you money/some benefit. Closely related, but not the same. So this is definitely not extortion. But it could be blackmail.

It is always illegal to threaten to press criminal charges unless some demand is met. It is almost never illegal to threaten to litigate a claim if a settlement isn't reached.

If the letter says "pay me/my client X or I'll release this damaging information," it would likely be blackmail. But, "unless you pay my client X, I will be forced to litigate this and there is a likelihood that damaging information about you will come out," is likely not.

Not the definitive answer you are probably looking for...but then, the answer in most legal cases is "it depends."

Spoken like a person with a lot of legal learning...

 

[bigorangepoppa]

Unfortunately, people use this tactic all too often. Most large entities would rather settle out of court so as to not have a long, drawn out court case. Settle and demand a non disclosure agreement to keep details out of the media.

 

[TNnative]

Seriously?

What about blackmail?

I guess you could call it that. I am kind of over it all.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Well, we knew he wasn’t a rocket scientist from the introduction press conference. The bar was pretty low. So far he still hasn’t cleared it.

First class Dipshit

 

[ksgovols]

Saber rattling? Yes. I there wasn't a $12.6 million buyout, it could be extortion. This is a disagreement concerning a contract.

Throwing the other members of the AD present and past under the bus is just ambulance chasing tactics. You don't know if it'll work until you try.