One thing that isn't in the complaint, and surely would have been because it would help immensely, is being pressured to dope. The fact she is trying for 20M on fat shaming basically tells me NOP were never dopers, or at least never sanctioned or pressured by Salazar to be so.
Oh Please wrote:
One thing that isn't in the complaint, and surely would have been because it would help immensely, is being pressured to dope. The fact she is trying for 20M on fat shaming basically tells me NOP were never dopers, or at least never sanctioned or pressured by Salazar to be so.
The claim for damages in a lawsuit is always a massive amount and Cain does not expect to receive $20M. If the jury rules in her favor they will decide the compensation for damages. A judgment for $5M would be a significant win for her.
Haven't you read about other lawsuits? Dominion is suing Giuliani for $1B.
Iron Bars wrote:
But, reading through the complaint, it sounds horrific and to a jury, will sound damning. Salazar is in deep trouble here. He will be held guilty. This is a very compelling presentation.
My question is, what were her parents doing ? It was clearly a bad fit from the get go.
it's a civil lawsuit, there will be no jury
The only way to get to the bottom of all this is for the suit to go forward everybody will be deposed under oath which means there would be penalty of perjury. I hope the suit goes to completion.
know the courts wrote:
Iron Bars wrote:
But, reading through the complaint, it sounds horrific and to a jury, will sound damning. Salazar is in deep trouble here. He will be held guilty. This is a very compelling presentation.
My question is, what were her parents doing ? It was clearly a bad fit from the get go.
it's a civil lawsuit, there will be no jury
Really? I must have been hallucinating when I saw one when I was testifying in a civil lawsuit trial against my wife.
know the courts wrote:
Iron Bars wrote:
But, reading through the complaint, it sounds horrific and to a jury, will sound damning. Salazar is in deep trouble here. He will be held guilty. This is a very compelling presentation.
My question is, what were her parents doing ? It was clearly a bad fit from the get go.
it's a civil lawsuit, there will be no jury
Nearly all civil lawsuits that get to trial in the US involve a jury. For federal cases, it's guaranteed by the 7th Amendment. For most state cases, it's also guaranteed by state constitutions.
For all practical purposes, the only civil cases that are not tried by jury, are when the parties agree to a bench trial. If even one party wants a jury trial, they will get one.
know the courts more wrote:
know the courts wrote:
it's a civil lawsuit, there will be no jury
Nearly all civil lawsuits that get to trial in the US involve a jury. For federal cases, it's guaranteed by the 7th Amendment. For most state cases, it's also guaranteed by state constitutions.
For all practical purposes, the only civil cases that are not tried by jury, are when the parties agree to a bench trial. If even one party wants a jury trial, they will get one.
It would be mind-blowing for one person to make the decision in this case. It's not for nothing that's there always a battle over jury selection.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
... when I was testifying in a civil lawsuit trial against my wife.
jecht wrote:
Prima Donna wrote:
I don’t see this complaint ending up anywhere close to what she’s asking. They will be settling for much less. First this is a he said she said case. She will need witnesses to help her prove the things he allegedly said. Secondly there is a statute of limitations. Likely many of her so called injuries she blames him on will be taken out of the complaint by a judge because it’s been over a year. If they remain she will need to prove without a doubt that Al caused them. Very hard to do. The only “injury” I see holding up is emotional abuse and that isn’t worth even a million. Sounds like sour grapes - ended up not being such a great runner and blames it on others
I empathize with Mary and Al Sal deserves punishment but here's the thing:
1) She's already famous and has made connections through running, so she could get a good job regardless, in Nike or a athletic company in PR/marketing/corporate development/outreach/speaking, etc.
2) She comes from a wealthy family so she had connections to begin with even had the running failed--she had a place to land in case things didn't work out. I think she even went back to school for pre-med so she's obviously STEM-smart as well.
The point is--even if her running didn't work out (and I agree with her that Al Sal was a mean SOB, etc. and abusive) she still had privilege, doors, and other means to succeed in life that most don't have to begin with. She didn't need to file the lawsuit at all to begin with.
It's not about the money. Forget about the Zero$ focus on the complaints.
least surprising post ever wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
... when I was testifying in a civil lawsuit trial against my wife.
The lawsuit was over a fender bender traffic accident. Although it seemed irrelevant, I was testifying as to the damage to our car. The plaintiff was suing my wife for $1M but received $4K.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
know the courts wrote:
it's a civil lawsuit, there will be no jury
Really? I must have been hallucinating when I saw one when I was testifying in a civil lawsuit trial against my wife.
It can definitely go to court and jury if a settlement isn’t reached. Most of the time there is a settlement because it can become cost prohibitive to continue otherwise
Tastes Like Chicken wrote:
middle school bully wrote:
Imagine if we got sued for every fat girl we came across in the middle school hallway. Good thing we don't have billions or those fat girls would come crying to a judge to get them a piece.
Hardly. Cain's case is based on the fact that Salazar was not some random bully but her coach. She claims that because he was her coach, he had a legal duty to treat her better than he did.
You can think the underlying law is bad, that the law suit is frivolous, or that Salazar should win, but you shouldn't get confused about the legal basis for the case.
Your claim is as irrelevant as a Cain supporter claiming that if Cain loses, female athletes will be slaves, or some such.
I read the case pretty carefully through p. 14, when my eyes began to cross. It's a substantial, well thought-through case, but the A through V list of charges against Salazar and the A through Whatever list of injuries and problems that Cain claims to have suffered as a result seems a little over the top.
I suspect that the legal strategy is precisely to over charge, over-claim, by piling a lot of stuff on. That gives the judge (and kibbitzers like me) a chance to say, "Whoa whoa: SOME of this makes sense, but other stuff is just crazy."
The duty of care charges are interesting. I tend to think that they're most compelling when the focus strictly on the physical stuff--like telling her to eat less but not letting a professional nutritionist help make those decisions. That actually sounds actionable. The less impressive stuff, by contrast, at least to me, is where she's moaning about the fact that, in effect, he wasn't nice to her.
Who the f do you think Alberto Salazar was and is? I remember his rep from the early 80s, around the time he suddenly erupted into view in the NY Marathon. (I came out onto the street and watched him flow by that day....the Central Park road around 96th St.) He was a guy who won because he beat himself into the ground and was, like Pre, willing to hurt worse than those he beat. He was the OG beast. I remember my Princeton roomates, top runners, talking about him back in 78-79. There was this guy up in Massachusetts, they said. Just an animal.
That's who he is. I'm not the slightest bit surprised, or disllusioned ("Oh my! What a HORRIBLE man!!") at what is revealed (or at least alleged) in this lawsuit. I'm not the slightest bit surprised that he talked obsessively about Cain's fat bottom (as he characterized it) and whatever else he did. Some coaches are nice, supportive, warm & runny. Cain surely knew, long before she arrived, that he was going to drive her hard. Does she bear ANY responsibility, at all, for having stayed once she realized what being coached by AlSal actually meant?
One fair question is: Does any of the abuse seem as though it WASN'T motivated, however fairly or unfairly, by a hard-driving, not-nice coach's desire to whip the best possible performances out of her? There's excessive and then there's pointedly sadistic. Sure, he was excessive by most standards. But was it done--or can his lawyers argue that it was all done--out of a good faith desire to produce excellence?
I think that the lawyers will sort this out. But I'd be wary, given what I read, of absolving Cain, even though she was young, from all responsibility for her choice to stay. Did whatever contract she'd signed have an exit clause? What sort of behavior on Salazar's part would have constituted actionable breach of contact such that she could have walked? COULD she have invoked breach of contract and walked? If so, why didn't she?
I suspect the lawyers will be arguing about that .
know the courts wrote:
Iron Bars wrote:
But, reading through the complaint, it sounds horrific and to a jury, will sound damning. Salazar is in deep trouble here. He will be held guilty. This is a very compelling presentation.
My question is, what were her parents doing ? It was clearly a bad fit from the get go.
it's a civil lawsuit, there will be no jury
If it ever were to make it to court, are you sure there'd be no jury? Oregon allows for jury trials in civil cases, doesn't it?
Also, right up at the top under the heading Complaint, this lawsuit says, "Demand for Jury Trial."
Oh Please wrote:
The fact she is trying for 20M on fat shaming basically tells me NOP were never dopers, or at least never sanctioned or pressured by Salazar to be so.
In the land of unicorns this might be proof, but this comment shows zero logic: A does not prove B, and visa versa.
Salazar (and Nike's) mentality is win at all costs. That is very clear. So, the idea of telling a clearly very healthy young woman she is overweight fits in perfectly with the use of PEDs.
Oh Please wrote:
One thing that isn't in the complaint, and surely would have been because it would help immensely, is being pressured to dope. The fact she is trying for 20M on fat shaming basically tells me NOP were never dopers, or at least never sanctioned or pressured by Salazar to be so.
That is a very good point.
I am sure Nike lawyers will use that to their advantage.
I haven't read the complaint, but in thinking about it, it seems to me that a key legal issue will be the terms of Cain's Nike contract and the amount of discretion it gave her on choosing, hiring and firing her coach. If the contract gave her complete power over choosing her coach, then her case will be extremely weak because she could have just changed coaches at any time without any loss of income to her.
Light the blue touch paper wrote:
Salazar (and Nike's) mentality is win at all costs. That is very clear. So, the idea of telling a clearly very healthy young woman she is overweight fits in perfectly with the use of PEDs.
Win at all costs. Of course, that what professional sport is about.
Nothing new really.
Light the blue touch paper wrote:
Oh Please wrote:
The fact she is trying for 20M on fat shaming basically tells me NOP were never dopers, or at least never sanctioned or pressured by Salazar to be so.
In the land of unicorns this might be proof, but this comment shows zero logic: A does not prove B, and visa versa.
Salazar (and Nike's) mentality is win at all costs. That is very clear. So, the idea of telling a clearly very healthy young woman she is overweight fits in perfectly with the use of PEDs.
You completely missed the point. If Mary Cain had been given PED's or pressured to use PED's, it would help her case enormously. The fact that it's not there is proof that Mary Cain was not given PED's nor pressured to used PED's.
NAIA nobody wrote:
I haven't read the complaint, but in thinking about it, it seems to me that a key legal issue will be the terms of Cain's Nike contract and the amount of discretion it gave her on choosing, hiring and firing her coach. If the contract gave her complete power over choosing her coach, then her case will be extremely weak because she could have just changed coaches at any time without any loss of income to her.
Of course she can't fire her coach or choose another one.
KudzuRunner wrote:
Tastes Like Chicken wrote:
Hardly. Cain's case is based on the fact that Salazar was not some random bully but her coach. She claims that because he was her coach, he had a legal duty to treat her better than he did.
You can think the underlying law is bad, that the law suit is frivolous, or that Salazar should win, but you shouldn't get confused about the legal basis for the case.
Your claim is as irrelevant as a Cain supporter claiming that if Cain loses, female athletes will be slaves, or some such.
I read the case pretty carefully through p. 14, when my eyes began to cross. It's a substantial, well thought-through case, but the A through V list of charges against Salazar and the A through Whatever list of injuries and problems that Cain claims to have suffered as a result seems a little over the top.
I suspect that the legal strategy is precisely to over charge, over-claim, by piling a lot of stuff on. That gives the judge (and kibbitzers like me) a chance to say, "Whoa whoa: SOME of this makes sense, but other stuff is just crazy."
The duty of care charges are interesting. I tend to think that they're most compelling when the focus strictly on the physical stuff--like telling her to eat less but not letting a professional nutritionist help make those decisions. That actually sounds actionable. The less impressive stuff, by contrast, at least to me, is where she's moaning about the fact that, in effect, he wasn't nice to her.
Who the f do you think Alberto Salazar was and is? I remember his rep from the early 80s, around the time he suddenly erupted into view in the NY Marathon. (I came out onto the street and watched him flow by that day....the Central Park road around 96th St.) He was a guy who won because he beat himself into the ground and was, like Pre, willing to hurt worse than those he beat. He was the OG beast. I remember my Princeton roomates, top runners, talking about him back in 78-79. There was this guy up in Massachusetts, they said. Just an animal.
That's who he is. I'm not the slightest bit surprised, or disllusioned ("Oh my! What a HORRIBLE man!!") at what is revealed (or at least alleged) in this lawsuit. I'm not the slightest bit surprised that he talked obsessively about Cain's fat bottom (as he characterized it) and whatever else he did. Some coaches are nice, supportive, warm & runny. Cain surely knew, long before she arrived, that he was going to drive her hard. Does she bear ANY responsibility, at all, for having stayed once she realized what being coached by AlSal actually meant?
One fair question is: Does any of the abuse seem as though it WASN'T motivated, however fairly or unfairly, by a hard-driving, not-nice coach's desire to whip the best possible performances out of her? There's excessive and then there's pointedly sadistic. Sure, he was excessive by most standards. But was it done--or can his lawyers argue that it was all done--out of a good faith desire to produce excellence?
I think that the lawyers will sort this out. But I'd be wary, given what I read, of absolving Cain, even though she was young, from all responsibility for her choice to stay. Did whatever contract she'd signed have an exit clause? What sort of behavior on Salazar's part would have constituted actionable breach of contact such that she could have walked? COULD she have invoked breach of contract and walked? If so, why didn't she?
I suspect the lawyers will be arguing about that .
^Creeper alert.