Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is what lawyers do. They pursue leads no matter how vague in the hopes of uncovering a case. If you told him the truth,it’s over. You cannot control what others say about you or even if they mention your name.
ohh..I'll bite! Let me guess, its a female, making claims to enhance her "meToo!" group mentality.
and as we know, there is much fame in "defamation" of character. Its the foundation by which this movement governs.
Since its such a vague post though, and no mention directly that the person "slandered" you, I'd side with others in recommending, silence is golden.
I would just not speak to the lawyer again. Or if you can't do that, just tell the lawyer that you want everything in writing going forward, and to not call again. Make him put his requests in writing. He probably won't.
I wouldn't get a lawyer until you had to.
It's not likely that any cause of action would still be within the statute of limitations after 5 years. In case you don't know what that means, there is a certain limit to the time you can wait before you sue someone. It's usually 1 - 3 years. After the statute of limitations has expired on whatever kind of lawsuit is involved, then it's too late to sue.
Oh, and the title mentioned slander. Slander is when someone verbally tells a lie about someone, knowing it's a lie, with the intention of hurting their reputation. Slander is verbal, libel is written.
Again, any action would have to be within the statute of limitations.
And then, if someone says something that is true, that's usually all they need to prove to be innocent. The saying is that truth is a perfect defense to slander.
The only exception, is if someone told the truth, but by telling the truth they were deliberately trying to ruin that person's reputation. An example is that someone was fired from their job for, let's say, stealing money from the company. Then the CEO announces at an event with professionals in the profession of the employee - all of the gory details of the firing and stealing, etc., naming this employee.
Even though what the CEO said was true, what he did with the truth was meant to destroy the career of the employee. In that case, even though he told the truth, he could be found guilty of slander because even though he told the truth, he intended to use the truth to destroy someone.
At any rate, I would not talk to this lawyer again, other than to only say to him, "I'm sorry, I've been advised that all of our communications should be in writing going forward. Please don't call me again." Then hang up. Let him think that meant you consulted with a lawyer. If he asks specifically if you have a lawyer, just repeat the above and/or hang up.
I don't see any mention of lawsuit or subpoena in the original post....so still not sure what is the issue? Only thing I got out of reading it was that a lawyer called asking you for information about another employee who you do not know. Seems like nothing to worry about
A single call with the threat of a possible major lawsuit is not "crying out loud." Why be mean?
Unless I am missing something, I don't see any mention of lawsuit in the first post
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
