Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Bleacher Report is your source??!? (Sark's lawyers)

13»

Comments

  • DerekJohnson
    DerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 69,745 Founders Club
    UWerentThereMan said:

    FremontTroll said:

    DerekJohnson said:

    Wonder why the attorneys aren't quoting from Hardcore Husky?

    Just wait for the USC attorneys' answer...
    USC attorneys are tanned, rested and ready.
    image
    as he emerges from THE FLAMES OF HELL
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • KoolAidMan
    KoolAidMan Member Posts: 319
    TTJ said:

    AEB said:

    I think he'll get a settlement. Employment law in CA is skewed towards the employee, and in Siete's defense, he admitted an addiction and admitted himself into a treatment facility whereupon he was canned. To fire someone while receiving treatment is dangerous. SCs response will be interesting. Don't assume they've got this air tight.

    I'd be shocked if USC ever pays a penny. Haden asked Sark in August whether he had a problem, and the answer was no. This case isn't about disability accommodation; it's about a guy who repeatedly showed up impaired at work.
    Whether Sark said no or not, he saw a psychologist and a psychiatrist and began treatment. At that point, his diagnosis should have been in the medical records. He can just ask for a release of his records.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • topdawgnc
    topdawgnc Member Posts: 7,839
    KoolAidMan said:

    TTJ said:

    AEB said:

    I think he'll get a settlement. Employment law in CA is skewed towards the employee, and in Siete's defense, he admitted an addiction and admitted himself into a treatment facility whereupon he was canned. To fire someone while receiving treatment is dangerous. SCs response will be interesting. Don't assume they've got this air tight.

    I'd be shocked if USC ever pays a penny. Haden asked Sark in August whether he had a problem, and the answer was no. This case isn't about disability accommodation; it's about a guy who repeatedly showed up impaired at work.
    Whether Sark said no or not, he saw a psychologist and a psychiatrist and began treatment. At that point, his diagnosis should have been in the medical records. He can just ask for a release of his records.
    He's getting something, but not 30 million.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    topdawgnc said:

    KoolAidMan said:

    TTJ said:

    AEB said:

    I think he'll get a settlement. Employment law in CA is skewed towards the employee, and in Siete's defense, he admitted an addiction and admitted himself into a treatment facility whereupon he was canned. To fire someone while receiving treatment is dangerous. SCs response will be interesting. Don't assume they've got this air tight.

    I'd be shocked if USC ever pays a penny. Haden asked Sark in August whether he had a problem, and the answer was no. This case isn't about disability accommodation; it's about a guy who repeatedly showed up impaired at work.
    Whether Sark said no or not, he saw a psychologist and a psychiatrist and began treatment. At that point, his diagnosis should have been in the medical records. He can just ask for a release of his records.
    He's getting something, but not 30 million.
    Chlamydia?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TTJ
    TTJ Member Posts: 4,827
    KoolAidMan said:

    Whether Sark said no or not, he saw a psychologist and a psychiatrist and began treatment. At that point, his diagnosis should have been in the medical records. He can just ask for a release of his records.

    image
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • UWerentThereMan
    UWerentThereMan Member Posts: 3,475
    and he had a CONTRACT!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter