8 ms·

That is a brutal response from Match and IAC. Their statement also mentions that two separate banks were part of the valuation. I'd be curious what their proof

That is a brutal response from Match and IAC. Their statement also mentions that two separate banks were part of the valuation. I'd be curious what their proof is. A couple fun phrases from the statement: > his merry band of plaintiffs > but sour grapes alone do not a lawsuit make

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ashelmire 8y ago
How do judges usually react to colorful language like that?
- staticautomatic 8y ago
  They usually think nothing of it.
- ohitsdom 8y ago
  These quotes are from a PR response statement to the lawsuit, not any official court filing by Match.
  - tomkinson 8y ago
    believe a lawyer looked at them.
    - ohitsdom 8y ago
      Sure, but the question was about how a judge would read them.
- tzs 8y ago
  It's already been mentioned that this particular document was not for a judge, but if it had been it would probably depend on the judge. Many judges treat legal writing as a form of literature, and like to use interesting or creative language instead of just sticking to a dry boring style. I'm sure such judges would not mind some colorful language in filings as long as it helps get the point across. A good lawyer will know if they are dealing with such a judge and write their filings appropriately. Here are some examples of judges deviating from dry boring writing. Noble v. Bradford Marine, Inc., 789 F. Supp. 395 (S.D. Fla. 1992) [1]. The section titles in the opinion are "Hurling Chunks", "Like a Winged Monkey Flying Out of the Ashes...", "NOT!", and "A Schwing and a Miss". Fisher v. Lowe, 122 Mich.App. 418, 333 N.W.2d 67 [2]. A tree was hit by a car, and the owner of the tree sued. Defendants won and plaintiff appealed. The appeals court wrote this opinion: We thought that we would never see A suit to compensate a tree. A suit whose claim in tort is prest Upon a mangled tree's behest; A tree whose battered trunk was prest Against a Chevy's crumpled crest; A tree that faces each new day With bark and limb in disarray; A tree that may forever bear A lasting need for tender care. Flora lovers though we three, We must uphold the court's decree. Affirmed When West [3], published a copy of this case they kept to the spirit of of the judge's writing, and their summary was: A wayward Chevy struck a tree Whose owner sued defendants three. He sued car's owner, driver too, And insurer for what was due For his oak tree that now may bear A lasting need for tender care. The Oakland County Circuit Court, John N. O'Brien, J., set forth The judgment that defendants sought And quickly an appeal was brought. Court of Appeals, J.H. Gillis, J., Gave thought and then had this to say: 1) There is no liability Since No-Fault grants immunity; 2) No jurisdiction can be found Where process service is unsound; And thus the judgment, as it's termed, Is due to be, and is, Affirmed [1] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/789/395/1641635/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/7... [2] http://kevinunderhill.typepad.com/Documents/Fisher_v_Lowe.pdf http://kevinunderhill.typepad.com/Documents/Fisher_v_Lowe.pd... [3] a publishing company that took copies of the public domain court opinions and added notes pointing out each important legal point in the cases, labeled those points from an extensive legal subject classification they maintained, and added indexes and cross references to the other cases in the same volume and in their prior volumes. This was in an era when everything was done with paper documents, not electronic. People who grew up with electronic documents and networks might find it quite interesting to look into how legal research worked in, say 1970. They might expect it to be cumbersome, but it was actually quite reasonable, due to metadata companies like West and Shepard's [4]. [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard%27s_Citations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard%27s_Citations
larkeith 8y ago
Honestly, this makes me lose any respect I might have had for them - while the lawsuit seems odd, resorting to ad hominem attacks is extremely unprofessional, and especially so in a PR statement. Civility and basic courtesy is not copyrighted, use it in your public statements.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  > Civility and basic courtesy is not copyrighted, use it in your public statements. POTUS would disagree. Civility and basic courtesy are no longer popular. Such is the world we now live in. Edit: Anyone care to dispute this? I don't agree with it, but I'm also not willing to ignore it.
  - samstave 8y ago
    Funny - I was just thinking the same thing: "But wacky match would have you believe their lowball offer was anything but the offer of a loser! sad!" I mean, for crying out loud...
    - erikpukinskis 8y ago
      That’s not a real quote, right?
      - samstave 8y ago
        Paraphrasing the Trump Tweets as seen here: https://www.npr.org/2018/08/13/638161148/in-presidential-tweet-trump-says-former-aide-was-a-loser-and-vicious https://www.npr.org/2018/08/13/638161148/in-presidential-twe...
  - dilap 8y ago
    I think you're right. Being civil doesn't pay dividends unless most other people are civil too too, and if incivility is punished. Neither of those things are true, generally, right now, so being civil just makes you look weak. C'est la vie.
bamorgan 8y ago
I worked for match group as a C-level executive and had a equity structure that was similar, but on a way smaller scale. They use outside firms and a methodology called baseball arbitration to come up with a FMV. Although I didn't like some of the decisions that impacted the value of my equity, I was always treated fairly.
- ed 8y ago
  Is this also known as pendulum arbitration? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_arbitration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_arbitration I assume the bank acts as arbitrator, and IAC is one of the parties proposing a valuation? How do they remove the bank's incentive to side with IAC?
  - bamorgan 8y ago
    Yeah, basically. If the founder disagrees with IAC's/Match's valuation, they can come up with their own valuation and the "independent" outside party picks the winner, with no modifications.
- baud147258 8y ago
  > with a FMV What's a FMV? F*ck My Valuation? /joke I think it's a for fair market value?

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ashelmire 8y ago

How do judges usually react to colorful language like that?

staticautomatic 8y ago
They usually think nothing of it.
ohitsdom 8y ago
These quotes are from a PR response statement to the lawsuit, not any official court filing by Match.
- tomkinson 8y ago
  believe a lawyer looked at them.
  - ohitsdom 8y ago
    Sure, but the question was about how a judge would read them.
tzs 8y ago
It's already been mentioned that this particular document was not for a judge, but if it had been it would probably depend on the judge. Many judges treat legal writing as a form of literature, and like to use interesting or creative language instead of just sticking to a dry boring style. I'm sure such judges would not mind some colorful language in filings as long as it helps get the point across. A good lawyer will know if they are dealing with such a judge and write their filings appropriately. Here are some examples of judges deviating from dry boring writing. Noble v. Bradford Marine, Inc., 789 F. Supp. 395 (S.D. Fla. 1992) [1]. The section titles in the opinion are "Hurling Chunks", "Like a Winged Monkey Flying Out of the Ashes...", "NOT!", and "A Schwing and a Miss". Fisher v. Lowe, 122 Mich.App. 418, 333 N.W.2d 67 [2]. A tree was hit by a car, and the owner of the tree sued. Defendants won and plaintiff appealed. The appeals court wrote this opinion: We thought that we would never see A suit to compensate a tree. A suit whose claim in tort is prest Upon a mangled tree's behest; A tree whose battered trunk was prest Against a Chevy's crumpled crest; A tree that faces each new day With bark and limb in disarray; A tree that may forever bear A lasting need for tender care. Flora lovers though we three, We must uphold the court's decree. Affirmed When West [3], published a copy of this case they kept to the spirit of of the judge's writing, and their summary was: A wayward Chevy struck a tree Whose owner sued defendants three. He sued car's owner, driver too, And insurer for what was due For his oak tree that now may bear A lasting need for tender care. The Oakland County Circuit Court, John N. O'Brien, J., set forth The judgment that defendants sought And quickly an appeal was brought. Court of Appeals, J.H. Gillis, J., Gave thought and then had this to say: 1) There is no liability Since No-Fault grants immunity; 2) No jurisdiction can be found Where process service is unsound; And thus the judgment, as it's termed, Is due to be, and is, Affirmed [1] https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/789/395/1641635/ https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/7... [2] http://kevinunderhill.typepad.com/Documents/Fisher_v_Lowe.pdf http://kevinunderhill.typepad.com/Documents/Fisher_v_Lowe.pd... [3] a publishing company that took copies of the public domain court opinions and added notes pointing out each important legal point in the cases, labeled those points from an extensive legal subject classification they maintained, and added indexes and cross references to the other cases in the same volume and in their prior volumes. This was in an era when everything was done with paper documents, not electronic. People who grew up with electronic documents and networks might find it quite interesting to look into how legal research worked in, say 1970. They might expect it to be cumbersome, but it was actually quite reasonable, due to metadata companies like West and Shepard's [4]. [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard%27s_Citations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shepard%27s_Citations

larkeith 8y ago

Honestly, this makes me lose any respect I might have had for them - while the lawsuit seems odd, resorting to ad hominem attacks is extremely unprofessional, and especially so in a PR statement. Civility and basic courtesy is not copyrighted, use it in your public statements.

craftyguy 8y ago
> Civility and basic courtesy is not copyrighted, use it in your public statements. POTUS would disagree. Civility and basic courtesy are no longer popular. Such is the world we now live in. Edit: Anyone care to dispute this? I don't agree with it, but I'm also not willing to ignore it.
- samstave 8y ago
  Funny - I was just thinking the same thing: "But wacky match would have you believe their lowball offer was anything but the offer of a loser! sad!" I mean, for crying out loud...
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    That’s not a real quote, right?
    - samstave 8y ago
      Paraphrasing the Trump Tweets as seen here: https://www.npr.org/2018/08/13/638161148/in-presidential-tweet-trump-says-former-aide-was-a-loser-and-vicious https://www.npr.org/2018/08/13/638161148/in-presidential-twe...
- dilap 8y ago
  I think you're right. Being civil doesn't pay dividends unless most other people are civil too too, and if incivility is punished. Neither of those things are true, generally, right now, so being civil just makes you look weak. C'est la vie.

bamorgan 8y ago

I worked for match group as a C-level executive and had a equity structure that was similar, but on a way smaller scale. They use outside firms and a methodology called baseball arbitration to come up with a FMV. Although I didn't like some of the decisions that impacted the value of my equity, I was always treated fairly.

ed 8y ago
Is this also known as pendulum arbitration? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_arbitration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_arbitration I assume the bank acts as arbitrator, and IAC is one of the parties proposing a valuation? How do they remove the bank's incentive to side with IAC?
- bamorgan 8y ago
  Yeah, basically. If the founder disagrees with IAC's/Match's valuation, they can come up with their own valuation and the "independent" outside party picks the winner, with no modifications.
baud147258 8y ago
> with a FMV What's a FMV? F*ck My Valuation? /joke I think it's a for fair market value?