InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 352
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/25/2017

Re: A deleted message

Thursday, 09/20/2018 1:42:21 PM

Thursday, September 20, 2018 1:42:21 PM

Post# of 4715
Fehy and Levy have established that they do not reply to email or other attempts at contact by members of this message board - however, in a lawsuit they could be court ordered or 'deposed' (interviewed) by a plaintiff's lawyer regarding any non disclosure agreements or paid settlements, IMO.

Here's a snippet from a website (reference only, not legal advice):

"It is not uncommon to find that witnesses otherwise willing to provide valuable information may believe they are unable to do so because they are parties to confidentiality agreements. Such agreements come in many forms, including non-disclosure agreements aimed primarily at protecting trade secrets and business information; termination agreements; or settlements of pending claims or litigations. These agreements may provide for forfeiture of economic benefits and forbid disclosure of their terms or, in extreme cases, even of their existence.

As a general rule, courts have not permitted such agreements to bar discovery or interviews, holding that they are against public policy.(2)

In Scott v. Nelson, 697 So. 2d 1300 (Fla. Dist. App.1997), Dr. Duke Scott had settled a prior litigation.The settlement agreement contained a confidentiality provision and Dr. Scott sought to bar the taking of the deposition of the settling party as witness in a subsequent action against him. The Court rejected the claim, noting that it was "improper to buy the silence of witnesses with a settlement agreement when the facts of one controversy may be relevant to another." Id. at 1301. In Grumman Aerospace Corp. v. Titanium Metals Corp., 91 F.R.D. 84, 87-88 (E.D.N.Y. 1981), the Court denied a motion to bar production of a report held by a witness, finding that parties cannot "contract privately for the confidentiality of documents, and foreclose others from obtaining, in the course of litigation, materials that are relevant to their efforts to vindicate a legal position." Accord Barger v. Garden Way, Inc., 231 Ga. App. 723, 499 S.E.2d 737 (1998).


End of quote.

The above has nothing to do with getting off couches or missing boats, it is a way to get to the facts, without attempts to distract or discourage anyone.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.