re: Moscona: SEC Presidents voted to dismiss lawsuit vs LSU

If they voted to dismiss and Sankey has decided to go rogue, this is one more VERY OBVIOUS reason why he should be fired.

Aside from all this being bad for LSU, it's also pretty bad for the conference. I'd assume the vast majority of the schools think removing LSU from the SEC is probably the stupidest thing to bring up. But the toxicity of even allowing it to be mentioned in actual channels is more than enough reason to dump this fricking clown.

Either they fire him or we MUST leave this conference. Nothing good can come of playing in a conference where your fellow member institutions hate you.

The SEC is not going to voluntarily dismiss the suit because it doesn't want costs assessed against it. It is also trying to save face. It is going to force the court to dismiss the case, in which case each party will probably be forced to pay its own costs, and the SEC can say it "tried to do the right thing" but the court disagreed.

Is it the people of LA vs the SEC ? How would she know ?

quote:

---

Is it the people of LA vs the SEC ? How would she know ?

---

Because the SEC added her to the suit

quote:

---

The SEC is not going to voluntarily dismiss the suit because it doesn't want costs assessed against it. It is also trying to save face. It is going to force the court to dismiss the case, in which case each party will probably be forced to pay its own costs, and the SEC can say it "tried to do the right thing" but the court disagreed.

---

If Murrill has the goods to show that the SEC president’s voted unanimously to dismiss the suit and the conference administration went rogue and continued to pursue, Defendants will likely seek sanctions against plaintiffs which would be a slam dunk.


Like I said in my previous post, either Murrill is a complete retard for lying about that or Sankey should be fired immediately for acting in blatant defiance of his superiors.

If the members actually voted to dismiss then the SEC office should fall in line

If what Murrill is saying is true Rousse should call for a vote today to remove sankey as commissioner.


Sankey serves at the pleasure of the membership. If he is defying a unanimous vote there is no justification for him to continue in his role as commissioner.

quote:

---

If Murrill has the goods to show that the SEC president’s voted unanimously to dismiss the suit and the conference administration went rogue and continued to pursue, Defendants will likely seek sanctions against plaintiffs which would be a slam dunk.


Like I said in my previous post, either Murrill is a complete retard for lying about that or Sankey should be fired immediately for acting in blatant defiance of his superiors.

---

LSU will not seek sanctions. As long as the suit is dismissed they will let sleeping dogs lie. No need to kick the hornets nest.

quote:

---

They didn't vote for that at all.

They voted in favor of a settlement agreement that included dropping the lawsuit.

LSU refuses to admit wrong doing and they refuse to promise they won't use the courts in the future. Thus the agreement was rejected and the lawsuit continues.

---

Where are you hearing this? The Louisiana AG says the conference presidents voted to drop the lawsuit, unconditionally.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Wow, so edgy and cool

---

It is strange to find a baw - especially on this board - who is still doing the #BelieveAllWomen and #MeToo thing.

Or are ya just an attorney? Do you believe everything opposing counsel says or files?

Or were ya elected dog catcher in Terrebonne Parish?

---

Nope, just being realistic.

I don't care that she's a woman or not, I'm not over on the Poli board demanding the 19th Amendment be repealed. There are plenty of women that would eat your arse (and mine) in a debate, or in a court of law. What little I've seen of Murrill prior to all this, she's not the "appeal to emotions" type.

She was Council to the Governor under Jindal during the British Petroleum spill, which was a big deal. Bigger than this SEC case would be. She was La Solicitor General and has handled cases before the US Supreme Court.

Her professional history tells me she's the type that has her ducks in a row, and it would be surprising if she's now out there just lying for sound bytes, because it would undo all the stuff she's done to gain respect.

quote:

---

Do you believe everything opposing counsel says or files?

---

Do you believe she just flatly lied about a specific event (the SEC presidents voting to dismiss the lawsuit)?

Just straight-out lied? About something that can be confirmed?