wrongful termination

Interesting. Hope this goes to court and this guy is shown to be a nut.

Just like there is a Quack claiming to be able to heal what ever ill you have, for every nut with a cause, there is a Quack that will take the case.

TAM

He's still claiming he works for UL? Nutter lol.

T.A.M. said:

Just like there is a Quack claiming to be able to heal what ever ill you have, for every nut with a cause, there is a Quack that will take the case.

TAM

Click to expand...

The new motto for the woowoos should be...


There's one born every minute...

I just want to know how anyone can claim that his firing was wrongful. But then again Mcdonalds did lose because they had sold hot coffee.

ETA - Now this is an interesting website about the Mcdonalds coffee caper.
http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

What I love is that he claims it's a defense fund when he's the one suing for damages. Should be entertaining to watch though.

So... This is a website from a known nutter asking the public to give him money to fight some legal case that has yet to proceed and has every indication of being tossed as a NON-case, without actually providing any details as to what the money is going to be used for.

In short, it's cyber-panhandling, no?

Zep said:

So... This is a website from a known nutter asking the public to give him money to fight some legal case that has yet to proceed and has every indication of being tossed as a NON-case, without actually providing any details as to what the money is going to be used for.

In short, it's cyber-panhandling, no?

Click to expand...

Maybe he should sell his computer

What makes you think he has one of his own? Internet cafes and back-street dope seem to fit right in to this scenario...

Well, as a woo was quick to point out over at DU, lots of organizations use "legal defense funds" to start lawsuits. But it is pretty audacious of the LIAR Kevin Ryan to find yet another way to roll the suckers.

I know what our US cousins mean by "wrongful termination", but it really sounds much more terminal than "unfair dismissal", doesn't it!

~enigma~ said:

I just want to know how anyone can claim that his firing was wrongful. But then again Mcdonalds did lose because they had sold hot coffee.

ETA - Now this is an interesting website about the Mcdonalds coffee caper.
http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

Click to expand...

There's more to the coffee story than most folks know.

Linky.

MortFurd said:

There's more to the coffee story than most folks know.

Linky.

Click to expand...

As ever the truth is more complex than the fiction.

Architect said:

I know what our US cousins mean by "wrongful termination", but it really sounds much more terminal than "unfair dismissal", doesn't it!

Click to expand...

Actually, I think "wrongful termination" sounds like they actually killed the wrong guy.

I really, really hope this goes to trial.

Chaos said:

Actually, I think "wrongful termination" sounds like they actually killed the wrong guy.

Click to expand...

That's a big problem for America, too. When it comes to executions, we're not too picky.

I wonder why this guy sprung into action so quickly with his lawsuit. Maybe it took that long to find a lawyer who was sufficiently insane.

Such chutzpah,

Given the circumstances, Kevin is lucky UL doesn't sue him for misrepresentation and messing with their reputation.

Here's hoping for a nice tongue lashing from the judge, right before dismissal.

Zep said:

What makes you think he has one of his own? Internet cafes and back-street dope seem to fit right in to this scenario...

Click to expand...

Well, at least one back street dope anyway!!

He's too nuts to realize he's nuts, but that's what makes it so funny.

Seriously, though, my father had to fire an employee for writing an editorial to a local newspaper as a "representative of [company X]." The editorial appeared in the morning paper, and the guy was gone by noon. Every large corporation in the country has similar rules and practices, and it's moronic to think that you can destroy company credibility while they're still paying you.

Actually, I'm kind of tempted to donate.

Wait, wait! Hear me out!

Think what it would look like if one of these CTist actually did get his day in court.

"Your honour, I present evidence that what I said was true and factual"

"What the hell are you talking about? This "evidence" is a farce!"

Now drag that out over a few days......They'd never recover from it! I think this lawsuit could be the best thing for us. The fact that they'd be shooting themselves in the foot again will never occur to them.

LIHOP, baby, LIHOP! Make it work for us this time!

Has his unemployment run out already?

How long do you suppose UL will allow their logo to appear on that website? Also don't lawyers in that specialty work on contingency? Is it possible he doesn't even have a lawyer or case number and is just pocketing the donations? And if thats the case should he be reported to the state DA in whatever state he resides in for fraud? And given the claims he has made in the past. Instead of suing for termination. Shouldn't he apply for mental disability?

Kevin Ryan's Website said:

To help ensure this accountability, I've filed a lawsuit against UL for wrongful termination. My attorneys and I hope to gain more information about UL’s role in the testing of the WTC steel assemblies, and any other involvement UL has had with the WTC towers or the NIST investigation. Since this lawsuit represents a critical need for information about public safety, we invite the public to contribute to our legal defense fund.

Click to expand...

So, from a legal perspective, there's a lot of nonsense here and a little possible non-nonsense. First, Ryan doesn't really explain the basis of his suit or give links to any legal documents filed or unfiled. My attempts to find any confirmation online from either the courts of St. Joseph County, Indiana or the federal court for the Northern District of Indiana came to nothing - neither have their court records online (maybe some lawyer with a PACER ID could double-check with the feds). The bottom line is, most of what I'm about to say is a guess based on Ryan's statements; I can't even say for sure that a suit has been filed.

Whether a state is an at-will state or not, an empoyee with an employment contract may only be fired in accordance with that contract. Also, whistleblower statutes may protect even those employees who do not have a contract. A contract need not be signed by the employee - a personnel manual or written company policies may create a contract. UL is the type of organization that is likely to have some sort of contractual duty only to fire an employee like Ryan for cause.

Did UL have cause? I have no idea. It appears that Ryan was fired for implying that his personal beliefs represented those of the company. That would, if true, certainly appear to be sufficient cause.

But what about Ryan's stated reason for filing the suit? There is almost no chance that a wrongful termination suit would allow Ryan to gain any information about "UL’s role in the testing of the WTC steel assemblies, and any other involvement UL has had with the WTC towers or the NIST investigation." These issues have nothing whatsoever to do with the reason he was fired. He was fired for appearing to speak for the company on matters he was not authorized to. Whether anything he said was true or untrue is not relevant. His attempts to discover these items should not succeed.

As to what type of lawyer would take the case - It's possible that the wrongful termination claim has enough objective validity to pass the smell test. And it's likely that Ryan's lawyer took the case not caring a damn about 9/11 or any of Ryan's motives, just the wrongful termination aspect. I generally don't care what motivates my clients - if I think they can win under the law, I represent them. It is also possible that the lawyer is a true believer, but this is unlikely. And, last, it is possible that there is no lawyer, that there is no case and that Ryan is just making it all up.

Good post Loss Leader, thanks for clearing some of that up for us.

Surely scholars for truth (no laughing now!) have some lawyers amongst their esteemed ranks who would take his case (stop sniggering at the back!) for free.....I'm sorry... can't type.....

They don't NEED lawyers....they've got (wait for it) COMMON SENSE!

Now they're trying to spin Kevin Ryan's letter to Frank Gayle of the NIST as some sort of internal memo, instead of a blatant example of professional dishonesty where someone tried to give the impression that they were speaking on behalf of their company.

If I did something like that, in my position, I would not only be fired, but most likely fined or punished by my professional accreditation board, possibly criminally prosecuted, and almost certainly sued by at least one party if not several.

Kevin Ryan got off easy.

PerryLogan said:

That's a big problem for America, too. When it comes to executions, we're not too picky.

I wonder why this guy sprung into action so quickly with his lawsuit. Maybe it took that long to find a lawyer who was sufficiently insane.

Click to expand...

He always could have used philip J. Berg if insane lawyers were what he needed.

Chaos said:

Actually, I think "wrongful termination" sounds like they actually killed the wrong guy.

Click to expand...

Yeah, well, I only did that once, and he deserved it anyway...

There is also the irony that this guy would be long dead if he'd spilled the beans on real conspirators.

Ryan getting a court hearing would only be surpassed by Killtown beiong dragged into court in a slander or libel suit.

Has anyone bothered to e-mail Ryan asking where the suit has been filed and stating that when it is they would be willing to donate?

Loss Leader said:

<snip>So, from a legal perspective, there's a lot of nonsense here and a little possible non-nonsense. First, Ryan doesn't really explain the basis of his suit or give links to any legal documents filed or unfiled. My attempts to find any confirmation online from either the courts of St. Joseph County, Indiana or the federal court for the Northern District of Indiana came to nothing - neither have their court records online (maybe some lawyer with a PACER ID could double-check with the feds). The bottom line is, most of what I'm about to say is a guess based on Ryan's statements; I can't even say for sure that a suit has been filed.

Click to expand...

I have a PACER account, Loss Leader. I'll take a look there when I get a minute this evening.

The same "panhandling" post was also posted on another board - certain twoofers are spreading it all over the woo boards - and I asked them to post a link to the filed suit or at least to provide the details of where and when it was filed, etc. but - nada.

I want to know which truthers are going to donate and how much. 28th kingdom has said he's willing to bet his life and the life of his friends on 9/11 being an inside job. Surely throwing a few dollars into this would be worth it to him.

LashL said:

I have a PACER account, Loss Leader. I'll take a look there when I get a minute this evening.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I have yet to bother getting admitted to the federal courts. Except for civil rights stuff and diversity jurisdiction, New York State has everything I need. Plus, practicing before judges who know me (and, in at least one case in my county, went to school with my mom) makes procedural things so much easier.

Loss Leader said:

Thanks. I have yet to bother getting admitted to the federal courts. Except for civil rights stuff and diversity jurisdiction, New York State has everything I need. Plus, practicing before judges who know me (and, in at least one case in my county, went to school with my mom) makes procedural things so much easier.

Click to expand...

You guys/gals in the profession are making it more and more difficult to refute the "GOB' hypotheses about "Reading at Law" when you make confessions like that. Report to your handler for reorientation, please.
Is that like Doctors "Practicing Medicine"? Da*n, I hate Practice! And it ain't made perfect yet!

Just FYI, you can still sue for wrongful termination in a an at will State. While a company technically needs no reason to fire you (nor do you have any obligation to give the company notice you're leaving), if you can provide evidence that the termination was due to illegal practices by the company you may have a case. In example, if you feel you were fired because of your race, the company would have to back up their decision to prove otherwise, that's why there's so much documentation in big corporations.

That said, I think the guy's a nutter, and can't decide if I want to see this go to court, to see him laughed out of it, or not, since we are technically paying for it...

Crazycowbob said:

Just FYI, you can still sue for wrongful termination in a an at will State. While a company technically needs no reason to fire you (nor do you have any obligation to give the company notice you're leaving), if you can provide evidence that the termination was due to illegal practices by the company you may have a case. In example, if you feel you were fired because of your race, the company would have to back up their decision to prove otherwise, that's why there's so much documentation in big corporations.

Click to expand...

The rule of thumb is: You can fire someone for no reason, you can fire someone for a good reason, but you can't fire someone for a no-good reason.

ETA: My clients constantly ask if they should tell an employee why they're being let go or a tenant why their lease is not being renewed. I practically shout "No!" into the phone and hang up.

ETA ETA: Then I bill them two hundred dollars.

Crazycowbob said:

Just FYI, you can still sue for wrongful termination in a an at will State. While a company technically needs no reason to fire you (nor do you have any obligation to give the company notice you're leaving), if you can provide evidence that the termination was due to illegal practices by the company you may have a case. In example, if you feel you were fired because of your race, the company would have to back up their decision to prove otherwise, that's why there's so much documentation in big corporations.

That said, I think the guy's a nutter, and can't decide if I want to see this go to court, to see him laughed out of it, or not, since we are technically paying for it...

Click to expand...

Yeah...so was waterboy fired for being a bad impersonation of Adam Sandler? What was illegal about his firing?

Well thay say he was fired for using his position at UL to make statements on behalf of UL without proper authorisation to do so.

He cannot show that he did have authorisation to cite his position at UL and imply that his comments were backed by UL.

Now Ryan is trying to spin his letter another way, or so it seems, so that it is more of an internal inquiry to another person.

jaydeehess said:

Well thay say he was fired for using his position at UL to make statements on behalf of UL without proper authorisation to do so.

He cannot show that he did have authorisation to cite his position at UL and imply that his comments were backed by UL.

Now Ryan is trying to spin his letter another way, or so it seems, so that it is more of an internal inquiry to another person.

Click to expand...

So nothing was wrongful and in all liklyhood waterboy is trying to raise enough money to pay for his new car.