Depending on what state you are in, courts may throw the whole agreement out if any provision is too restrictive. A NY court just issued such a decision on the basis that doing anything less (i.e. enforcing a reasonable scope in place of what was in the contract) would take away any incentive for the employer to…

I know it's not the right response, but I sort of hope someone punches her in the face for saying that.

I'm not sure if you're offering up a nice sentiment or a guess at what Abraham actually thinks right now.

Did you stop watching hockey in 1992? Because everything since then have been lockouts. There is a big difference if you want to use the narrative of millionaires being spoiled brats when it's their billionaire bosses that refused to let them play while they negotiated. You may get to the same conclusion re:…

multiply by 9/5 and add 32, eh?

As if Roger is reading your comment. Anyway, if he was, he'd just decide to begin manufacturing and selling branded taint shields with NFL team logos on them. You can't stop him.

Your point and mine aren't mutually exclusive. I was just also pointing out that this man has also been her chief source of financial well-being and that the NFL and law enforcement can't disregard that to decide to go easy on him based on her asking them to do so.

I'll take it!

Thanks. Was just getting ready to get frustrated trying to get this on my xoom... hopefully you've saved me some time.

But you're asking them if that's their point before you refute — giving them a chance to update it if you're missing anything. That's the whole point, they have to admit that you understand what you're saying before you even start countering. If they try to game it the way you suggest, they'll have to counter what…

If you're really a lawyer, seeing someone resort to post-trial victim blaming should make you uncomfortable too. Lawyers like this give us all a bad name.

Where does the constitution guarantee your right to counsel after the criminal matter has been adjudicated? Nowhere. So no, no one has to invent a bullshit story after the trial to slander the victim. Period.

You spelled "know" wrong while bragging about what you know. That's funny. Justifying his despicable behavior as a defense strategy when the trial phase had passed is bullshit and you know it. But I'll quit distracting you, I'm sure there's an ambulance you need to get chasing after.

First of all, what could you know, you're just Someguy on the internet?

He learned it from Rice's lawyer. Just don't ask him to read it in a sentence.

I'm actually very smart. Thanks for asking.

Ok, the article calls him a piece of shit, your counter is: probably. That's a pretty vigorous defense.

Except for drastically cutting the number of uninsured.

The article you're arguing with didn't say he didn't do his job, just that he's a piece of shit — just like you've admitted in the comment I'm replying to. Begs the question, what exactly are you arguing with?

Do you need TMZ to watch the video for you? Why don't you watch it give us the CompuBox numbers?