|
Could it be an attempt to influence public opinion and a possible jury by making him appear a victim; his rights have been violated by a big nasty corporation? If his contract, as you point out, gives him a good case he doesn’t need a great contract lawyer. Even so, I am sure he or his attorney have consulted one. |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
The First Amendment may play into the claim that Imus did nothing wrong — i.e. CBS could not then fire him for cause, such as doing something illegal. If it was legal to say what he did, then CBS would have to spell out exactly what it was that Imus did that allowed CBS to cancel his contract "for cause."
I would imagine that Imus’ lawyer will have a vast wealth of audio and video footage to bolster his case. Essentially it is evidence that CBS allowed Imus to make such "off-color" remarks before without giving him any warnings or reprimands. If the contract provides for some sort of warning before taking disciplinary action (i.e. a breach/notice/cure period), then CBS is in the wrong by terminating the contract (and, FWIW, if CBS breached the contract first it can’t then sue for a breach). Accordingly, CBS can’t plausibly claim now that Imus breached some clause of his contract by saying the same things he’s always said.
That’s my best guess as to what the pleadings will look like. |
| |
Written By:
MichaelW
URL:
http://asecondhandconjecture.com
|
CBS has no cause here. They have to pay him. Imus is going to be able to show the 5 million times where they said nothing or encouraged him when his show went after Catholics or Jews or whoever.
They should stop being stupid and quietly pay up. |
| |
Written By:
shark
URL:
http://
|