3 ms·

I have an anecdote about this. I worked at Disney for some time and a coworker was an avid 2nd amendment person. They left their firearm in their car as is le

I have an anecdote about this. I worked at Disney for some time and a coworker was an avid 2nd amendment person. They left their firearm in their car as is legal for any employer with a very short list of exceptions. I think munitions development is one of the exceptions, and Disney qualifies because of their massive fireworks shows. I'm very foggy on these details as it's been many years since. Anyways, he was chatting it up with a security person and it came out in convo that he had his firearm in his car. He was immediately fired and removed from the property. He tried to fight it in court. Now this individual was remarkably stupid just as a general person, regardless of this event. I don't have any interest in debating the merits of what happened to him one way or the other. However, it was interesting that the Disney lawyer explicitly informed his lawyer that their strategy would be to just bleed him dry into bankruptcy by getting continuances and stuff forever into the future, which would force him to keep paying his lawyer to show up and do stuff, but would never move the case forward.

henryfjordan 7y ago
If Disney explicitly told this guy's lawyer that was their plan, his lawyer would be game to let them drag it out because he'll get all his attorney's fees back at the end on Disney's dime. You have to legitimately believe you can succeed in court, you cannot just file stuff to slow the process. Now maybe they just implied that or something, but I very much doubt the story happened exactly as described.
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  In order for the drag it out and get attorney's fees back plan to work, you have to be really confident you'll win. I doubt that was the case.
- pnw_hazor 7y ago
  Hmm, maybe that was what the plaintiff lawyer said to encourage the guy to drop a case he didn't want to do anymore after learning more of the details. Often employee-side lawyers take cases based on contingency fees or shared/blended deals that mix hard money with contingency fees. If the case turns out to be a turd, some lawyers do just about anything to get out of it. On the other hand, Disney's lawyers would have unlimited budgets and would be incentivized in stringing out the case as long as possible to get that sweet Disney money. They would have no interest in encouraging an early settlement unless they thought they would lose.
kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
This is why you only live in states with single-party consent recording privileges and document everything these sleezeballs say. Then hand it over to the judge.
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  That sounds nice in theory, but the second order effect of that kind of thing happening a lot would be the megacorp lawyer doesn't warn you first. Then, after you are bankrupt, you may or may not figure out what they did to you. But you still lost and you're still bankrupt.
- benibela 7y ago
  But then your employer pulls out the recording of all the awkward things you said at work.
- openasocket 7y ago
  I'm sure the lawyer actually said something much more nuanced that meant more or less the same thing but didn't rise to the level of an actual threat to subvert proceedings in bad faith. Anything that is said between counsel is admissible in court, and if the Disney lawyer did that, not only would that hurt their defense, it could mean ethics complaints and sanctions for the lawyer, personally.

henryfjordan 7y ago

If Disney explicitly told this guy's lawyer that was their plan, his lawyer would be game to let them drag it out because he'll get all his attorney's fees back at the end on Disney's dime. You have to legitimately believe you can succeed in court, you cannot just file stuff to slow the process. Now maybe they just implied that or something, but I very much doubt the story happened exactly as described.

Consultant32452 7y ago
In order for the drag it out and get attorney's fees back plan to work, you have to be really confident you'll win. I doubt that was the case.
pnw_hazor 7y ago
Hmm, maybe that was what the plaintiff lawyer said to encourage the guy to drop a case he didn't want to do anymore after learning more of the details. Often employee-side lawyers take cases based on contingency fees or shared/blended deals that mix hard money with contingency fees. If the case turns out to be a turd, some lawyers do just about anything to get out of it. On the other hand, Disney's lawyers would have unlimited budgets and would be incentivized in stringing out the case as long as possible to get that sweet Disney money. They would have no interest in encouraging an early settlement unless they thought they would lose.

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago

This is why you only live in states with single-party consent recording privileges and document everything these sleezeballs say. Then hand it over to the judge.

Consultant32452 7y ago
That sounds nice in theory, but the second order effect of that kind of thing happening a lot would be the megacorp lawyer doesn't warn you first. Then, after you are bankrupt, you may or may not figure out what they did to you. But you still lost and you're still bankrupt.
benibela 7y ago
But then your employer pulls out the recording of all the awkward things you said at work.
openasocket 7y ago
I'm sure the lawyer actually said something much more nuanced that meant more or less the same thing but didn't rise to the level of an actual threat to subvert proceedings in bad faith. Anything that is said between counsel is admissible in court, and if the Disney lawyer did that, not only would that hurt their defense, it could mean ethics complaints and sanctions for the lawyer, personally.