Making fun of public officials has long been established as free speech.

-- Modified on 2/5/2013 9:16:52 AM

the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

      I didn't see the show but if a reasonable person cpuld conclude Maher made an offer and Trump accepted it,  we have an oral contract for which Maher will be liable if he breached it. No different that Romney's "bet" with Governnor Perry at the debate. If Perry had accepted it, either party could sue for breach of contract if the other failed to perform.  

Being a public figure has nothing to do with it.

...elements of a contract.  But if all you see is black & white, that's pretty poor lawyering.  

The offer has to be considered to be serious and Bill Maher was obviously joking.  Also (notice I didn't say "furthermore"), Trump didn't satisfy the terms of the offer merely by proffering his birth certificate.  He has to supply a DNA sample from his mother proving she wasn't part orangutan.  Get the backhoe, mari!!

People always complain about frivolous lawsuits.  The best way to deal with them is suing the other party for malicious prosecution/abuse of process after winning your case.  It's not usually done because of the cost and the fact that you're tired of litigation.  Bill Maher has deep pockets and should go after Trump after he wins his case.

...civil cases (in California). Here's some MCLE for you...

Malicious prosecution requires three elements of proof:

   A lawsuit was filed by or at the direction of the defendant, and was pursued to a legal termination in plaintiff’s favor;
   The prior lawsuit was brought without probable cause; and
   The prior lawsuit was initiated with malice.


With all Trump's $, Scott Balber is just another trained monkey.  He's not going to risk losing Trump's business by saying no to him.

who has argued before the  United States Supreme Court and won millions of dollars in commercial litigation of filing a frivolous lawsuit and -omg-  "poor lawyering?? This guy charges $800 an hour and is one of the most dead serious attorneys around.

      Besides you missed the key caveats in my post “ if a reasonable person could find an offer and acceptance.” If so, no summary judgment and it goes to the jury.

        Trump did accept the offer in writing thru Mr. Balber, the Cooley litigation partner. So the only real question is whether Maher’s expressions on television could be construed as an offer to Trump by an objective reasonable person – whether Maher subjectively was “joking” is entirely irrelevant to the lawsuit. Whether Trump performed the contract will be a question for the jury.

       Sorry, no malicious prosecution (which does not apply to civil lawsuits anyway) or abuse of process when your attorney is Cooley LLP.

      I suppose you think that the class action defamation lawsuit I’m planning to file against Maher on behalf of all  orangutans and similarly situated monkeys is frivolous as well. How would you like to be publicly accused of fathering Donald Trump?

      Back to first year contracts class for you and don't ask for any part of the settlement I'm going to get. I just hope Maher doesn't pay me in bananas.

I have a question: is this post politics, or religion?

engrafting criminal law concepts onto a civil action. For example, you don't have to have "probable cause" to file a civil lawsuit. So, if that is an element, you must have some strange definition of probable cause for the tort.

      I think the Restatement deals with this problem by calling the tort "wrongful civil proceedings" rather than malicious prosecution.

Talk about somebody being an idiot and taking out billboards.

I've never watched the apprentice, but I'd like to see how he'd react if the tables were turned; not that he would even allow himself to experience it.  

he's just an A type personality or 'He's got balls." If a Hispanic guy acts that way he's macho. If a black guy acts that way he's uppity. If a woman acts that way she's a flaming bitch.  Probably the fact that Obama, being black, and even having considered running for president, was considered by many, particularly in the south, as being uppity.  

...you horndog.  They both have the same amount of legal authority - NONE!

Seriously, mari, you should use the same disclaimer mrfisher does in his legal posts: "still not a lawyer."

use of drones to kill American born terrorists. Pat just dosen't like the way Obama says it. He liked the way Bush said it better.


I still think Laffy, is by far the most "arrogant" for playing the Bush/Right vs Obama/Left game. When it comes to discussing America's wars.






http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2013/February/Senators-to-Probe-Brennan-on-CIA-Drone-Program/

Unemployed Porn Star with a lot of time on my hands. But I'll leave the hornybooks to you and continue working on the Restatement (Second) of Pussy for which I foresee great sales to some of the clueless on this Board.