Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Judge dismisses 4 of 7 counts in Dan Rather’s lawsuit against CBS
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, April 10, 2008

Aw, gee ... I hate that.

There's some dispute as to what that really means.

Says CBS:
Jim Quinn, lead counsel for CBS tells TVNewser, "We're thrilled with the results. The core of the allegations of fraud and fair dealing have been thrown out. What's left is a garden variety contract dispute."
Says Rather's attorney:
Justice Gammerman issued a decision today which leaves in place the entire essence of Mr. Rather's lawsuit against CBS and Viacom, including both contract and tort claims. Although not every legal theory of the case survives, as a result of the decision, the Court has permitted discovery and a trial of all of the factual issues that form the basis of Mr. Rather's lawsuit, including his $70 million claim for compensatory and punitive damages. The defendants' statement that all that is left is a "garden variety contract dispute" is simply inaccurate.
Not every legal theory of the case survives? What does that mean? And left intact are all the 'factual issues' - so does that mean the other 4 counts weren't "factual?" Sounds a little defensively lawyerly if you ask me.

CBS then issued another statement:
We are gratified that the court has dismissed the majority of Mr. Rather's claims, including the spurious claims against Mr. Redstone, Mr. Moonves and Mr. Heyward, as well as the false charges of fraud, tortious interference with prospective business relations, breach of good faith and fair dealing. With respect to the few remaining claims, relevant to his contract, there are no facts to support them and we expect them to be dismissed when the discovery process is complete.
Sounds to me, if this is accurate, that we are indeed dealing with a garden variety contract dispute. But then I don't think there were many out here in TV land who Dan had much of a case anyway. At least not as Dan envisioned it.

The actual ruling by the judge is at the link above. Here's what I found:

The seven counts were (and the 4 which were dismissed):

1. Breach of contract, against CBS

2. Breach of fiduciary duty, against CBS

3. Fraud, against CBS, Moonves and Hayward

4. Breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, against CBS

5. Tortious inducement of breach of contract, against Viacom, Redstone, Moonves and Hayward

6. Tortious interference with prospective business relations, against all defendants

7. Prima facia tort, against all defendants

Additionally the judge ordered the complaint "severed and dismissed" against Redstone, Moonves and Hayward and has ordered only CBS and Viacom to answer the remaining complaint.

Huh. Seems like a garden variety contract dispute to me.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

I haven’t read the report... but a motion to dismiss basically means that even if everything the plaintiff said was true and proven, the plaintiff would still lose. The 4 causes of action that were dismissed did not assert facts and law that would support liability.

The 3 that remain could. They need to find facts. At this stage, all it means is that if everything is as Dan Rather says it is, he might win. Once discovery takes place, many of the facts will be established - and the rest of the claims can be established.

Discovery is what I’m excited about. I’d love to hear all about the goings on at CBS during the preparation of this story..
Written By: MichaelB
URL: http://
Rather sues CBS . . . check.
Democratic convention . . . check.
Supreme court decesion on gun rights . . . check.
Popcorn . . . need to stock up.
Written By: Don
URL: http://
but a motion to dismiss basically means that even if everything the plaintiff said was true and proven, the plaintiff would still lose.

I don’t think the standard is that stringent. The plaintiff has to show some volume of evidence supporting the claims.
Written By: ben
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks