This is one of the most frivolous lawsuits of all time.
-He's literally suing because they removed his name off the online roster of the years that he was at Dartmouth. He is calling it "TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE IN PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP".........schools literally do that all the time. It is NOT "publishing false information" as they have no responsibility to keep the link to his bio active for the rest of eternity.
-He is suing Dartmouth because an employee of Dartmouth who didn't know there was a nondisclosure agreement, gave Justin a bad recommendation.
-He is suing because the spouse of the person in the non-disclosure agreement said somethings about him. But the spouse is not bound by the non-disclosure.
-He is suing because a member of the Dartmouth booster club (volunteer, not employee) said that the coaches had said that he quit. Well, if you sign a separation agreement then you technically did quit!
Lawyer here. This is an odd and misinformed post from someone who clearly has an axe to grind and knows nothing about the law.
My quick take after skimming the complaint is that Wood has a strong claim. He has pretty good evidence that Harnden was disparaging him, and given her role at Dartmouth this would implicate Dartmouth at least as far as the breach of contract claim. As an aside, she almost certainly was aware of the terms of the separation agreement, but that wouldn't absolve her or Dartmouth even if she didn't.
So, on these facts, the breach of contract claim is pretty straightforward and compelling. Libel by her is also pretty clear and I don't think he's remotely a public figure so legal standard is lower. Tortious interference might play too.
OK, so when I call the University of the Incarnate Word's athletic department and ask if he assists with the Cross Country team, which I am going to do in the next five minutes, they are going to say yes?
This is one of the most frivolous lawsuits of all time.
-He's literally suing because they removed his name off the online roster of the years that he was at Dartmouth. He is calling it "TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE IN PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP".........schools literally do that all the time. It is NOT "publishing false information" as they have no responsibility to keep the link to his bio active for the rest of eternity.
-He is suing Dartmouth because an employee of Dartmouth who didn't know there was a nondisclosure agreement, gave Justin a bad recommendation.
-He is suing because the spouse of the person in the non-disclosure agreement said somethings about him. But the spouse is not bound by the non-disclosure.
-He is suing because a member of the Dartmouth booster club (volunteer, not employee) said that the coaches had said that he quit. Well, if you sign a separation agreement then you technically did quit!
Lawyer here. This is an odd and misinformed post from someone who clearly has an axe to grind and knows nothing about the law.
My quick take after skimming the complaint is that Wood has a strong claim. He has pretty good evidence that Harnden was disparaging him, and given her role at Dartmouth this would implicate Dartmouth at least as far as the breach of contract claim. As an aside, she almost certainly was aware of the terms of the separation agreement, but that wouldn't absolve her or Dartmouth even if she didn't.
So, on these facts, the breach of contract claim is pretty straightforward and compelling. Libel by her is also pretty clear and I don't think he's remotely a public figure so legal standard is lower. Tortious interference might play too.
I have just one question about your analysis...
You don't think that a coach at an Ivy League school is a public figure?
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
OK, so when I call the University of the Incarnate Word's athletic department and ask if he assists with the Cross Country team, which I am going to do in the next five minutes, they are going to say yes?
Yeah, that was a quick phone call.
Anyone have any other hot tips with where he coaches.
Hey "Coach Dahl," would you care to enlighten us on where you coach?
Yeah, I'll lighten up that I am leaning hard against him not being a public figure, given the sport and his role.
However, coaches of higher profile sports absolutely are. So chill, Barrett.
Not barret. Even the BYU women's coach from india or Mike Smith are not public figures. You would have to be a government employee or celebrity to be considered a public figure.
Last I checked there are 4 or 5 universities in San Antonio that are part of the Catholic Clergy. Incarnate Word is not one of them. Trinity definitely is. Lady of the Lake and St Mary's definately are.
Yeah, I'll lighten up that I am leaning hard against him not being a public figure, given the sport and his role.
However, coaches of higher profile sports absolutely are. So chill, Barrett.
Not barret. Even the BYU women's coach from india or Mike Smith are not public figures. You would have to be a government employee or celebrity to be considered a public figure.
Last I checked there are 4 or 5 universities in San Antonio that are part of the Catholic Clergy. Incarnate Word is not one of them. Trinity definitely is. Lady of the Lake and St Mary's definately are.
1) You are DEAD wrong. Basketball Coach at Duke? Football at Texas? Yeah, those are 100% public figures.
This is one of the most frivolous lawsuits of all time.
-He's literally suing because they removed his name off the online roster of the years that he was at Dartmouth. He is calling it "TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE IN PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP".........schools literally do that all the time. It is NOT "publishing false information" as they have no responsibility to keep the link to his bio active for the rest of eternity.
-He is suing Dartmouth because an employee of Dartmouth who didn't know there was a nondisclosure agreement, gave Justin a bad recommendation.
-He is suing because the spouse of the person in the non-disclosure agreement said somethings about him. But the spouse is not bound by the non-disclosure.
-He is suing because a member of the Dartmouth booster club (volunteer, not employee) said that the coaches had said that he quit. Well, if you sign a separation agreement then you technically did quit!
Lawyer here. This is an odd and misinformed post from someone who clearly has an axe to grind and knows nothing about the law.
My quick take after skimming the complaint is that Wood has a strong claim. He has pretty good evidence that Harnden was disparaging him, and given her role at Dartmouth this would implicate Dartmouth at least as far as the breach of contract claim. As an aside, she almost certainly was aware of the terms of the separation agreement, but that wouldn't absolve her or Dartmouth even if she didn't.
So, on these facts, the breach of contract claim is pretty straightforward and compelling. Libel by her is also pretty clear and I don't think he's remotely a public figure so legal standard is lower. Tortious interference might play too.
Also it's suspicious that your post got so many upvotes in a short period of time, while no other posts near yours received any votes.
Somehow, dozens of people clicked this thread and for some reason only decided to upvote your post.....OR one guy has been upvoting himself from all of his devices and browsers.
Fascinating lawsuit filed this week by former Dartmouth XC coach Justin Wood, who resigned abruptly in 2022 after just one XC season.
Wood claims he resigned after raising concerns about Porscha Dobson Harnden, who was the director of track & field at the time. He claims she was "leading those programs with a glaring disregard for Ivy League and NCAA policies, along with potential admissions fraud and laxities taken with the health and safety of Dartmouth’s student-athletes."
After he leaves and signs an agreement, though, is where things get very interesting. Wood claims he was in the final stage of the process for the NYU coaching job when he learns that Dartmouth was blackballing him. As evidence, he cites a Letsrun message board post from 2022 in which the poster claims Wood resigned "because he was associated with some inappropriate actions by coaching friends of his."
Wood claims called Letsrun and was told by "the manager of the blog" -- perhaps Weldon or Robert? -- that he had spoken with Harnden's spouse about the circumstances surrounding Wood's departure.
Rojo/Wejo - Care to way in?
Dumb lawsuit. He's suing Dartmouth because they didn't give him a glowing recommendation.
No school wants to hire the guy who sued his former school. He will lose this lawsuit and it will end his coaching career because of it.
No, he is suing because this site allowed and enabled libel based on the "manager" having a conversation with the spouse of the person out to get him. Don't quit your day job, whatever that is (McDonald's? Jack In The Box?)
Yeah, I'll lighten up that I am leaning hard against him not being a public figure, given the sport and his role.
However, coaches of higher profile sports absolutely are. So chill, Barrett.
Not barret. Even the BYU women's coach from india or Mike Smith are not public figures. You would have to be a government employee or celebrity to be considered a public figure.
Last I checked there are 4 or 5 universities in San Antonio that are part of the Catholic Clergy. Incarnate Word is not one of them. Trinity definitely is. Lady of the Lake and St Mary's definately are.
Calls completed.
"No, that person does not coach here."
Any other hot tips? I've got all day and I'm not shy about picking up the phone.
Also it's suspicious that your post got so many upvotes in a short period of time, while no other posts near yours received any votes.
Somehow, dozens of people clicked this thread and for some reason only decided to upvote your post.....OR one guy has been upvoting himself from all of his devices and browsers.
Dumb lawsuit. He's suing Dartmouth because they didn't give him a glowing recommendation.
No school wants to hire the guy who sued his former school. He will lose this lawsuit and it will end his coaching career because of it.
No, he is suing because this site allowed and enabled libel based on the "manager" having a conversation with the spouse of the person out to get him. Don't quit your day job, whatever that is (McDonald's? Jack In The Box?)
The spouse was not limited by the separation agreement. The spouse had 100% freedom to say anything.