Patrick Reed at it again (*** NO LIV DISCUSSIONS/REFERENCES ***)

[Krt22]

Reed is seeking.....$750 Million! 🤣

[DavePelz4]

Just saw this on a Matlock rerun...

 

[MaineMariner]

18 minutes ago, tw_focus said:

The rules for libel / slander are very clear and sports media does not get a free pass just because they are trying to deliver hot takes. I look forward to seeing this resolved in an impartial court of law.

 

(1) As a public figure, Reed must show actual malice in his defamation claim. This is an extremely high bar to clear; and (2) truth is an absolute defense to defamation claims.

 

I would bet every cent in my bank account that this suit is summarily dismissed in short course.

Edited August 17, 2022 by MaineMariner
Snark removed - don't want to have this thread moderated

[MtlJeff]

14 minutes ago, carrier street said:

MY BROS DON'T YOU FOLLOW @USEGOLFFACTS ON TWITTER WHICH IS DEFINITELY NOT PREED OR HIS WIFE THAT WAS FAKED ON LIVE TV IN REAL TIME!!!!! WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!!

 

 

 

Anyone who uses Sheeple is an immediate follow for MtlJeff. It's my favorite new word of the past 2 years

[betarhoalphadelta]

4 minutes ago, MaineMariner said:

 

As an attorney (apparently), you surely know that (1) as a public figure, Reed must show actual malice in his defamation claim. This is an extremely high bar to clear; and (2) truth is an absolute defense to defamation claims.

 

I would bet every cent in my bank account that this suit is summarily dismissed in short course.

 

I read the complaint and thought to myself "unless the legal standard for defamation is CONSIDERABLY lower in Texas than anywhere I'm familiar with, Reed has no case."

 

Anything related to LIV and its funding would be seen as statements of opinion and not demonstrable falsehoods. Most of the cheating stuff as well. Especially the one where they defend Reed by saying he was *only* assessed a two-stroke penalty for an incident and not DQ'd. 

[larrybud]

Discovery will be fun to watch in this one!

 

[maowv]

Reed's case is going nowhere. 

 

Why do I say that?

 

First, Reed is going to be considered a "public person" in the eyes of the law. As such, the threshold for liability is extremely high and requires a level of intent that Reed is not likely going to be able to prove. 

 

Second, much of what has been reported on Golf Channel about Reed's ethical challenges has been echoed throughout the golf world. Many of his colleagues have expressed the same views/concerns about his willingness to bend the rules or outright cheat. That narrative has been in the public space since his college days.

 

Third, his lawyer is not to be taken seriously. Klayman himself has had his license suspended for ethical violations. He files crazy lawsuits that go nowhere. Seems to be a publicity hound who barks at the moon for a few weeks until his lawsuits are dismissed, or he loses. You end up with this type of lawyer when the serious lawyers turn you down.

 

This is another Patrick Reed sideshow that will be forgotten in a few months after the GolfChannel's lawyers eat his lunch. Federal courts are not a welcome forum for publicity stunts.

Edited August 17, 2022 by maowv

[DFG]

2 hours ago, dhacker56 said:

Chamblee will be right on his heels then... Hopefully with an empty wallet. Just because someone does not agree with him or anyone else does not make his views "twisted" nor does it make him on par with Hitler!

Some of the things this lawyer has done/said are beyond a "difference of opinion" or whatever you want to brand it as. He's done and said some completely despicable, racist things. 

[Konklifer]

He should be able to easily handle BC's attorney's fees.

[Krt22]

15 minutes ago, MaineMariner said:

 

(1) As a public figure, Reed must show actual malice in his defamation claim. This is an extremely high bar to clear; and (2) truth is an absolute defense to defamation claims.

 

I would bet every cent in my bank account that this suit is summarily dismissed in short course.

What are the chances BC/GC file a counter suit to cover their legal fees?

[Dr. Block]

And the clown college trots out another new act. Professional golf used to be a refuge from this crap.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Dr. Block
language

[deh]

My nephew once played a US Open pre-qualifier with Reed in Houston. Patrick was incredibly polite to a high school kid - kudos there. Neither ended up moving on to the actual qualifier and if memory serves me correct Reed beat him by 2. Since that interaction, I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, and since that time he has continued to demonstrate who he really is. He has cheated, and his peers have noted he cheated. He has then lied about cheating when a proper mea culpa might have saved what was left of his image after his college fiasco and other unsavory things.

 

This suit and his whole approach is simultaneously sad/appalling and hysterical. His "attorney" is clearly insane, and this suit does absolutely nothing but keep the Saudi Tour (which Reed's attorney is on record railing against) in the forefront of the news. I am beyond exhausted with all of this nonsense. I do not watch the LIV Tour, have no respect for Norman or any of the pros that took the cash, and have no desire to see it succeed. Their apparent strategy of attempting to bleed the PGA Tour dry through litigation is quite on brand. Norman needs to go away.

[DavePelz4]

19 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I read the complaint and thought to myself "unless the legal standard for defamation is CONSIDERABLY lower in Texas than anywhere I'm familiar with, Reed has no case."

 

Anything related to LIV and its funding would be seen as statements of opinion and not demonstrable falsehoods. Most of the cheating stuff as well. Especially the one where they defend Reed by saying he was *only* assessed a two-stroke penalty for an incident and not DQ'd. 

 

Smart to file the lawsuit in the country of Texas.

Edited August 17, 2022 by DavePelz4

[tiderider]

1 hour ago, carrier street said:

 

My favorite part of this is if you think anyone other than LIV/PIF/SA paid ole' Larry's retainer, I have a lovely bridge I've been looking to offload.

where?

[Dr. Block]

I'm sure it's only coincidence. I'm sure Reed has come to this on his own momentum, but the timing of the headline (which is really all that matters in todays attention span lacking world) seems oddly well placed to coincide with Tiger's General Patton round up to lay the framework for the LIV offensive. I wonder if LIV popped him an extra check to cook this thing up as a little salvo on the media battleground.

 

Sadly, this whole battleground professional golf is going to get quite a bit more undignified before it gets any better. 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Dr. Block

[carrier street]

14 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

I'm sure it's only coincidence. I'm sure Reed has come to this on his own momentum, but the timing of the headline (which is really all that matters in todays attention span lacking world) seems oddly well placed to coincide with Tiger's General Patton round up to lay the framework for the LIV offensive. I wonder if LIV popped him an extra check to cook this thing up as a little salvo on the media battleground.

 

Sadly, this whole battleground professional golf is going to get quite a bit more undignified before it gets any better. 

 

 

The timing is absolutely intentional. First playoff event, Mickelson v PGA Tour. Second, PReed v BC and Golf Channel. I will wager kingdoms that something will drop Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. LIV v OWGR is a pretty safe bet, but a list of players in the Tour Championship who have already committed to LIV also has pretty strong odds.

[leezer99]

43 minutes ago, maowv said:

Reed's case is going nowhere. 

 

Why do I say that?

 

First, Reed is going to be considered a "public person" in the eyes of the law. As such, the threshold for liability is extremely high and requires a level of intent that Reed is not likely going to be able to prove. 

 

Second, much of what has been reported on Golf Channel about Reed's ethical challenges has been echoed throughout the golf world. Many of his colleagues have expressed the same views/concerns about his willingness to bend the rules or outright cheat. That narrative has been in the public space since his college days.

 

Third, his lawyer is not to be taken seriously. Klayman himself has had his license suspended for ethical violations. He files crazy lawsuits that go nowhere. Seems to be a publicity hound who barks at the moon for a few weeks until his lawsuits are dismissed, or he loses. You end up with this type of lawyer when the serious lawyers turn you down.

 

This is another Patrick Reed sideshow that will be forgotten in a few months after the GolfChannel's lawyers eat his lunch. Federal courts are not a welcome forum for publicity stunts.

 

Texas also has the Texas Citizens Participation Act which is their version of an anti slapp law.  

[Les Strokes]

Pathological liars believe their own lies.

 

Reed seems to think he can force people to love him. Sorry Pat, it doesn't work that way.

[caniac6]

How can Chamblee defame character when Reed has none? They can start with his college team mates from U.Ga. and Augusta St., and  Chamblee will have lack there of character witnesses lined up around the block. I’m kind of surprised Reed hasn’t sued his estranged parents for making him the person he became.

Edited August 17, 2022 by caniac6

[bscinstnct]

While the defense will presumably cite references and witnesses to confirm its assertions, Reed plans to vigorously defend his good name and will call character witnesses of his own including 

 

Tonya Harding

 

Jose Canseco

 

Janos Slynt

 

 

 

 

[rizzo66]

Patrick Reed was at  the 3M open , where I run the practice facility, and I found him the be a really genuine nice young man. Really polite and engaging to the volunteers. His entourage on the other hand could only be described in 1 word - ******' -- IF he was smart he's shed them like the old skin on a snake and start over.

 

[the bishop]

Is Klayman a partner at Dewey, Cheatham & Howe?

[me05501]

Disclaimer: not a PReed fan, not a Chamblee fan.

 

I think PReed is only trying to shut Chamblee up. Whether the suit holds up or not, it will have some effect on tempering the criticism from TGC commentators. 

[Robby_Hughey]

"But, but, Brandel called me names and hurt my feelings and called me out on things that have been proven by several fist hand witnesses" man how soft has society become. All you need is $400 in this litigious world and you can sue anyone.

 

Not a Brandel fan by any stretch, but he gets paid to postulate and comment on golf. Much like Azinger, Faxon, and Ian Baker-Finch. Their word is not the end all beat all, but as a media broadcaster, they need someone and something to talk about when it's dark out. 

[jdl]

27 minutes ago, caniac6 said:

How can Chamblee defame character when Reed has none? They can start with his college team mates from U.Ga. and Augusta St., and  Chamblee will have lack there of character witnesses lined up around the block. I’m kind of surprised Reed hasn’t sued his estranged parents for making him the person he became.

 

[Dr. Block]

20 minutes ago, Robby_Hughey said:

"But, but, Brandel called me names and hurt my feelings and called me out on things that have been proven by several fist hand witnesses" man how soft has society become. All you need is $400 in this litigious world and you can sue anyone.

 

Not a Brandel fan by any stretch, but he gets paid to postulate and comment on golf. Much like Azinger, Faxon, and Ian Baker-Finch. Their word is not the end all beat all, but as a media broadcaster, they need someone and something to talk about when it's dark out. 

Soft is right. You think Ben Hogan would have sued Grantland Rice if he said a few snarky things about him? Not a chance. He'd have caught him coming out of the hotel bar and tuned him up a little bit. 

[Robby_Hughey]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

Soft is right. You think Ben Hogan would have sued Grantland Rice if he said a few snarky things about him? Not a chance. He'd have caught him coming out of the hotel bar and tuned him up a little bit. 

Not a snow ball's chance. They would have duked it out in the lot and both would walk away, without the loser suing for not receiving a participation trophy. 

[subrew]

44 minutes ago, me05501 said:

Disclaimer: not a PReed fan, not a Chamblee fan.

 

I think PReed is only trying to shut Chamblee up. Whether the suit holds up or not, it will have some effect on tempering the criticism from TGC commentators. 

 

That may be the only thing that comes of this.  Chamblee having to shut up, and he can blame "can't say anything during ongoing litigation" type stuff.  

 

Chamblee is a hard character for me.  He can have some great things to say during the pre and post game shows about people's games, strokes, playing that is really fascinating to hear.  Then he gets on his soapbox and you have to change the channel immediately.  I'm not one for "shut up and dribble" but there are times when I wish Chamblee would "shut up and stick to analyzing golf swings and scores."

 

 

[tungstenplug]

This particular attorney has a reputation for filing lawsuits he has no intention of winning. Instead, it is an opportunity to obtain information to be used for another purpose. Anytime you can subpoena old data/conversations/records and then subsequently ask people questions under oath, there is a likelihood that some kind of bombshell will come out

 

Edited February 26, 2023 by tungstenplug

[betarhoalphadelta]

46 minutes ago, me05501 said:

Disclaimer: not a PReed fan, not a Chamblee fan.

 

I think PReed is only trying to shut Chamblee up. Whether the suit holds up or not, it will have some effect on tempering the criticism from TGC commentators. 

 

5 minutes ago, subrew said:

 

That may be the only thing that comes of this.  Chamblee having to shut up, and he can blame "can't say anything during ongoing litigation" type stuff.  

 

 

Per @leezer99, if Chamblee is able to successfully get this tossed out of court on anti-SLAPP grounds, this could be over MUCH more quickly than a typical civil suit. If that's the case, the amount of time Chamblee has to shut up might be very short. 

 

I don't know enough about Texas' anti-SLAPP law to know if it's got teeth, and/or if there are specific exclusions in there that would be relevant. I.e. I'm not speculating this exists in the Texas law, but they could have an exclusion for "public figures" to make the law more protective for "regular people" and assume public figures can handle the litigation. The goal of anti-SLAPP is to protect people from the cost and trouble of defending against nuisance suits, so such an exclusion for "public figures" could exist on the assumption that they can handle litigation that a typical Texas citizen can't.

 

2 minutes ago, tungstenplug said:

This particular attorney has a reputation for filing lawsuits he has no intention of winning. Instead, it is an opportunity to obtain information to be used for another purpose. Anytime you can subpoena old data/conversations/records and then subsequently ask people questions under oath, there is a likelihood that some kind of bombshell will come out

 

In my opinion, this lawsuit is simply an attempt to obtain information proving collusion between the PGA Tour and the Golf Channel / golf media in general. That would go a long way in helping prove the PGA Tour actively tried to shun LIV Golf from the competitive landscape, and would help LIV's case in the larger lawsuit they are actually trying to win

 

In other words, this P. Reed lawsuit is a pawn in the broader LIV Players vs. PGA Tour lawsuit already filed, which is not scheduled to be tried until at least mid-2023

 

Multiple lawsuits are used as a way to drain parties' finances as well, of which one side in this case has a distinct advantage

 

 

If this is tossed on anti-SLAPP grounds, that happens prior to discovery. Per above, not sure if they'll be able to get it tossed or not in Texas on those grounds.