Pryor considering suing NCAA / ESPN

Submitted by Michigantrumpet82 on June 9th, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Per John Taylor, who had copy of transcript, Pryor's lawyer was interviewed on Sirius/XM's Jason & The GM show. Larry James said Pryor may pursue legal action against Outside The Lines for their report on Pryor and his connection to Dennis Talbott. He then hints at action against the NCAA.

Any legal action would appear to subject Pryor to legal discovery (testimony under oath / document production). This avoids the NCAA's lack of subpoena power issues.

Please be easy on me. This is my first post and from my IPhone no less. If I made any mistake or I missed this in another post it is purely inadvertent.


Zone Left

June 9th, 2011 at 11:28 PM ^

He doesn't consider that he'll have to testify about why he's ineligible and that doing so sets him up for federal tax evasion charges. The IRS won't bother with news reports about 20K, but they're less likely to let tax evasion under oath go unpunished.


June 10th, 2011 at 7:43 AM ^

Plus, it's in the news. They don't even have to look for evidence and he's basically admitted part of it. I'm sort of surprised that prior isn't considering suing Ohio and their football program, since they would be the ones he would have been working for.


June 9th, 2011 at 10:51 PM ^

Nothing wrong with reporting this.

As to Pryor, as an attorney, I can ssay that unless there is something fact-specific that I do not know (standatrd disclaimer), TP would have no case against the media.  ESPN did nothing wrong - they had a source and they reported it.  As for the NCAA, all they did was investigate. 

PLease, oh please, TP, bring these lawsuits.  I really would like for a court with subpoena power (and the ability to charge his lying ass with perjury if he lies in court, which he can;t help himself from doing) to preside over his whole fiasco.


June 9th, 2011 at 11:39 PM ^

Since TP is a public figure, he would not only have to prove that one or more statements were false, but that they were made with "actual malice."  That phrase is a little deceiving, since it basically means that the media either knew the statements were false or consciously disregarded a substantial risk that the statements were false.  

In practice, public figures almost NEVER win libel suits.  There is a mountain of precedent, much of it from the Supreme Court and based on the First Amendment, which works against libel plaintiffs.  Winning those cases for the defendant is like shooting fish in a barrel.

I see this as a bluff.  And one that won't work.  ESPN is used to the threat of lawsuits and it would never deter them from pursuing future stories.

My read on this is that the lawyer is now driving TP's bus.  He's taking TP wherever the lawyer wants to go.  I have no idea who this guy is or where he came from, but based on appearances that's sure what it looks like.

03 Blue 07

June 10th, 2011 at 1:12 AM ^

Yes, this is completely correct. The only time public figures have a shot in hell is if it's a "false light invasion of privacy," such as a case where a misleading headline says something like "Football Star Has AIDS" with his picture next to it, but it's an actual story about someone else. Or something like that- a little hazy trying to remember this shit from years ago. Generally, though, if you're a public figure, unless someone makes a factual statement about you that is undeniably false (such as "Terrelle Pryor Has Secret Rocket in Ass; Secret to Success" and then details that he does, in fact, have some sort of rocket in his ass, which can be easily disproved), they (almost) never win.

Mr Miggle

June 9th, 2011 at 10:53 PM ^

never, ever going to happen

Same guy said he was 100% certain 8 of the 9 additional players named in SI story would be cleared. I hope he keeps talking.


June 9th, 2011 at 10:55 PM ^

God, I hope he sues them.  Can you imagine the discovery?  Everything we ever wanted to know about  his cars, bank accounts, Sarniak?  It would be sensational.


June 9th, 2011 at 11:07 PM ^

You've already shown yourself capable enough to generate an untold number of laughs on this board. I think you've practically guaranteed yourself an illustrious career as an attorney.


June 10th, 2011 at 12:03 AM ^

But juries will.

I'm not an attorney, but rather a business consultant. Our professions are remarkably similar and we use many of the same terms to describe them, (e.g. client, practice, partner, discovery, ...). One of the best things I ever learned was how to make a memorable presentation. The best way is to use humor, (without making pratfalls, of course).

I bought and read a book that I still recommend to my young employees called Why Business People Speak Like Idiots. It's a fast read, highly entertaining, and it contains some great suggestions for presenters. For people like you who are naturally quick witted and funny, you'll find a lot of it to be very useful.


June 10th, 2011 at 12:29 AM ^

Blue - I obviously don't know you, but from your posts I can tell you're almost certainly smarter than people I know who have passed the bar. It's basically just memorization. I think a bright grad student who didn't go to law school could pass it if he or she had eight weeks to study.

Zone Left

June 9th, 2011 at 11:09 PM ^

You'll be fine.

Also, nice first topic to the OP. It's something that hasn't been on the board and is topical.

I'd love to hear the case against the NCAA. It would be awesome--although I can't imagine that lawyer is going to accept payment in Buckeye jerseys and outstanding lawsuits aren't going to help him convince an NFL team to pick him up. 

In another two years, we may be hearing about how the lawyer took Pryor for the last pair of gold pants he has...

Mi Sooner

June 10th, 2011 at 12:00 AM ^

the 'roid boy above did something too few OU football players did -- he went to class and was carrying about a 3.3 at the time in the B-school.  Okay, it isn't the Ross school, but a number of the profs at that time came from michigan, including the dean.  the OU b-school was considered a pretty good one -- probably still is.




June 10th, 2011 at 2:03 AM ^

You'll be fine man. Sure the last thing you want is advice at this point, but I'm gonna throw this out there anyway. I found the best thing was having one constant study partner. Someone to push you when you just can't study any more and bounce questions off of to make you think on your feet. Two people was the ideal pairing, when we got 3, 4, 5 involved it devolved into conversations and strayed off of the studying. Worked pretty well, my study partner and I both passed the Texas Bar comfortably and only one point apart on the final scoring.


June 10th, 2011 at 9:37 AM ^

Do what I did:

Look around at your class and count off the number of people who consistently arrived late to class on Monday bragging about how wasted they were on the weekend; those who came to class on an infrequent basis; those who spouted nonsense in class as if it were gospel truth (they will end up as judges); and those who just plain spouted nonsense with one or another looks of bewilderment on their faces. Note that they are the curve makers who will help you succeed. Then consider that 8+ out of ten of your class will pass the Bar. Subtract the aforementioned most likely to fail and - voila - you have your confidence. 

At least that's what I told myself, although it didn't always curb the anxiety.


June 10th, 2011 at 9:45 AM ^

It's like the ancient proverb says: "If you find yourself running away from zombies, you need not outrun the zombies.  You need only outrun the guy next to you."

83% of people pass, and WAY more than 17% of people are idiots.  I'm feeling okay about it.