Pacquiao suing mayweather? court date.

Time to grow up and learn what consequences are....:roll:

 

Look my friend I'm about to graduate from law school in May and I can tell you its much more difficult to prove defamation when you're a public figure because you have to prove actual malice which is a difficult requirement to meet.

You should try doing your legal research on lexis or westlaw and not wikipedia. It's not exactly exhaustive or authoritative although it is pretty accurate though I must admit.

 

Is it difficult to prove? Yes.

But does he have a right to pursue it considering the damage it causes to him as a boxer? Definitely.

False allegations are false allegations.

@ Sensei, perhaps I have higher standards for responses coming from law students, but you don't sound like one.

And everything you responded with was in Philla's last post.

 

You dont sue. You take the test and then kick his ass in the ring for talking ****.

 

He's not just a boxer. But a politician in his country. If he was a boxer only, don't think he would give a flying ****.

 

:deal

:deal

 

Or you can do both if the accusing party mans the **** up instead of beating up women. BTW...you like how he does that right? :hey

 

I find it odd this wannabe law student unconditionally defends a profesional boxer who beats women. Then again, maybe he's researching potential clientele. :hey

 

O Yeah i forgot politican don't lie. gtfoh

 

"malice"?

if floyd's defence was "lack of malice" he would get raped in court. he has no good faith basis to say what he's saying...& when confronted with the fact he can't prove what he has said he didn't apologise but instead repeated the claim. "malice" would be proved by his lack of contrition.

he would probably go for the defence that what he said was an "opinion" & as such "fair comment" (and thus free speech). that would make it a hard case to try as you're making it about civil liberties. but all pac's lawyers would have to show is that what floyd said would be potentially damaging to pac's livelihood & floyd was aware of the consequences of what he said...as well as the fact that he couldn't prove what he said to be true & knew this...so if pac did chase this he would probably win as it's a fairly blatant slander.

but pac dropped it. he's getting on with his life while floyd & his family clog up the courts with all the other **** they're involved with. good for him.:happy

 

Well I guess my professors in law school had it wrong

 

I am a 1L student and I concur with you completely...

 

Yes you can: First Amendment.

Maybe not everywhere, but that's a luxury of living in the United States.

You didn't see Barry Bonds suing every sports media outlet, did you? Or Roger Clemens? Or Lance Armstrong?

C'mon folks, 75% of athletes are on PED's. I don't expect them to admit it, but don't take us for fools.

 

Void has shown zero proof that Pac is a drug addict. Void is just showing his extreme fear.

Void fans love women beaters! I can't stand them.

 

Funny how quick the lawsuit got dropped. Just goes to show, how pac team used it as another way out of the fight in the first negotiations.

I will never forgive pac for fighting Joshua punching bag Clottey instead of mayweather.