• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Rich Rodriguez (official thread of last laughs)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
In many jurisdictions a lawyer must preserve any objections to questions asked of o witness during a deposition by formally objecting to the question when it is asked. If the lawyer fails to object at that time, in most cases he is deemed to waive the objection and cannot complain latter at trial when the answer to the question is read from the deposition transcript. The lawyer directs the witness to answer in cases where there is a belief that a judge would overrule the objection in order to avoid having to call all of the people involved in the deposition for another sitting. A lawyer will direct a witness not to answer a question when the answer would infringe on some privilege such as attorney-client privilege, attorney work product privilege, priest-penitent privilege, physician-patient privilege and the like. If the lawyer allows the witness to divulge privileged information, then the privilege is waived.
 
Upvote 0
LightningRod;1173460; said:
In many jurisdictions a lawyer must preserve any objections to questions asked of o witness during a deposition by formally objecting to the question when it is asked. If the lawyer fails to object at that time, in most cases he is deemed to waive the objection and cannot complain latter at trial when the answer to the question is read from the deposition transcript. The lawyer directs the witness to answer in cases where there is a belief that a judge would overrule the objection in order to avoid having to call all of the people involved in the deposition for another sitting. A lawyer will direct a witness not to answer a question when the answer would infringe on some privilege such as attorney-client privilege, attorney work product privilege, priest-penitent privilege, physician-patient privilege and the like. If the lawyer allows the witness to divulge privileged information, then the privilege is waived.
Click to expand...
Thanks....I think I understand now: the rule is in place to keep lawyers from dragging trials out absurd lengths of time by objecting to lines of questioning that they didn't like the answers from in the deposition; the lawyers will therefore object to pretty much the entire case just to preserve their right to do it later and hope that when they later review the deposition they can find something that will stick in court. Probably also helps keep the opposition from knowing exactly when an objection will be raised during the trial. Does that sound right? Robon does this all the time and it was kind of keeping me from understanding exactly what was going on in the depositions.
 
Upvote 0
The objection-you may answer line is done to save time and expense. When you consider the crowded court dockets and a general practice by judges from interfering too much in the deposition process, the time involved with court reporters, witnesses, attorneys and their commitments to other trials, and on and on, nothing would get done if the parties were forced to run to the courthouse for every little thing.

Changing the subject a little I have only started reading Brown's testimony, and I am amazed that the man as an agent does not have a written contract with any of his coaching clients. I would not do a simple tax return today without a person signing an engagement letter the sets out at a minimum the scope of my duties and the compensation expected. Robon is an absolute tool. On page 46 of the deposition Robin states that only attorneys have clients. Agents have customers. EDIT - starting at page 99 the deposition gets real interesting. Recall that Brown admits that neither he nor his buddy Eric are lawyers when reading these pages. Also recall from RR's deposition that no other lawyer was involved in advising RR on the last WVU contract amendment. You get what you pay for.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Starting a page 111, Line 13, Brown just sunk the Good Ship RR. Brown admits that RR signed the last WVU contract amendment against the advice given to him by his own 2 agents, his wife, his financial adviser, and his attorney who was only handling deferred comp matters. I see a motion for summary judgment on RR's fraud complaint coming real soon. No wonder the WVU attorneys stated to the paper that they see nothing substantive happening during mediation. EDIT - recall Brown making statements when this dispute first arose about bombshells dropping. LOL!!!
 
Upvote 0
Pages 164-188 isn't helpful to DRod either. His agent admits that the first time they felt WVU was in breach of the contract was on Dec. 16th 2007, yet he had shopped DRod to Arkansas and michigan the week before. Also shopped DRod around to LSU and Arkansas in 2005, and UNC and Bama in 2006.
 
Upvote 0
I'm not sure if I were RichRod I would have done anything any different because it was a good move on his part. The folks at TSUN knew or should have known who he was. After all TSUN has all these prople with abbreviations behind their names that get paid to know better yet they had no clue. The hand writing was on the wall, it certainly was not a case of "hindsight." What else could they expect besides a protracted legal battle for money that everyone believes is Rich Rods to pay period, deep down regardless of any smoke and mirrors. Now their coach can't be trusted, has a bad name, has difficulty recruiting classes and everyone asks why. I'll tell you why... its all of TSUN upper echelon who ok'd the deal that should be hung with their heads on the line save for Lloyd Carr. Now isn't that all ironic?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top