I'm convinced most people don't understand how lawsuits work. What exactly would those two at-will employees be suing for?

Brady’s hypothetical defamation suit would be dismissed at the pleadings stage.

Illinois football didn't score any runs this past season? Tell me more interesting factoids.

Exactly. Deadspin sucks about that. They'll kick a guy long and loud, but when he does well...

I think they'd be missing the point of the comparison.

I’d like to see the details of how this is implemented. Hgh levels vary for different people and fluctuate at different times of the day. They’d need to do several tests just to get a reliable base line for that player and then test him at a similar time of day to when the baseline tests were taken in order to have a…

The whole “silly bunny” thing makes more sense now.

This guy or gal is definitely a law student lol. Anywho, why are we assuming the issue is causation? The Bucs hire doctors, their doctors treat players. In many cases, players are required to use team doctors. The allegation is that the Bucs doctors recognized a condition that they knew or should have known to be…

This is my favorite thing on the innanets today. Awesome.

Shout out to Northwestern State University. Go Demons!

lol that was a crab dribble and a half

You're joking, but Marty McSorley got a charge and he played a game where getting targeted by a dirty goon is actually a assumed risk. If the punchee had been seriously hurt or concussed, I wonder if charges would indeed have been explored. Even as it is, if this were a pickup game in the park, charges might be…

2 games for a blatantly dirty and malicious play...

There are services that actually compile all of this info. According to fantasypros.com, John Paulsen of 4for4.com is the most accurate "expert" so far this year. Berry is the highest ranked ESPN guy at 73 (no one else is ranked better than 90).

This is the second time you've mentioned being an attorney. I know you're an attorney. I suspected law student at one point, but you've since clarified.

Preliminary note: the province of six-factor tests is briefs and appellate arguments, not trial courts. Anyway, prosecution has the burden of proving that the right to confront should be forfeited due to a defendant's actions taken with the intent to prevent a witness from testifying. Unless you've got the defendant…

If the dv victim is alive, the confrontation clause still controls. Plus that rule is too easy to game. . . just move her down to her cousin's house prior to the cutoff for whatever the statute/common law eventually defines as the period for "living with the alleged abuser."

Xactly

I know the rule-I invoke it whenever the opportunity presents itself-I was just being snarky. I think your proposed rule does not account for the danger of jurors attaching significant weight to an "official report" that generally makes an affirmative statement with regard to the ultimate issue in the case. It also…

I don't see this as BB being dickish. The reporter shouldn't be asking a minute long question and the other reporter certainly shouldn't be asking a question that calls for an obvious yes or no if it isn't his/her intent to solicit a yes or no. Elementary stuff...