RE: PotpourriIceshaver....After reading your childish dissertation in your last post, I have come to the conclusion....You do not know what you are talking about.......I refer you the post by "goodtoreadthis" who states he is a lawyer in the US.....I'm coming to the conclusion maybe you and artie, the "ankle biter" really don't know what you are talking about. Maybe we should have a survey on this board for classifying your intelligence. .....Richard
Anyway...here is "goodtoreadthis" post
RE: Queenstake Update
10/3/2010 3:13:21 PM | | 141 reads | Post #28666453
"As an attorney here in the states in 3 jurisdictions, what Queenstake has done is perfectly legal and absolutely correct from both a legal and business standpoint. Plaintiff's attorneys are now bargaining for themselves and not their clients, and the only one who can break that logjam is the judge overseeing the lawsuit. If Queenstake leaked the motion to the press, that is a violation of the confidentiality agreement. The leak could have come from one of the plaintiff workers who is anxious to get paid and doesn't give a hoot about his lawyer's pay. In settlements, every plaintiff must be told the offers in detail so all the workers know the settlement offer.
Queenstake is right. Since this is very early in a case where no discovery has occurred, it will be very hard to produce support for $650,000 in legal fees let alone $800,000 in legal fees. The attorney bill for plaintiffs is I expect not sustainable before a judge.
The workers may have leaked this settlement offer to the press to get pressure on their own attorneys. That their names appear in the press report suggests to me that the workers are more than a little ticked at being held hostage for legal fees."