Judge Ends Lawsuit Against Disney

[kbmb]

Just an FYI....

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/custom/tourism/la-032904disney_lat,0,1708858.story?coll=orl-home-headlines

Added:

Jurist finds that plaintiffs obtained evidence improperly. The 13-year-old litigation claimed Disney withheld royalties for use of some Winnie the Pooh characters.


-k

 

[Lee]

Beautiful.

 

[wannabeBelle]

We got the Pooh !!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: Belle

 

[TiggerBW]

and Tigger too!!!!

YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :sohappy:

 

[PeeplMoovr]

Hopefully Disney will win on the appeal (should there be one), too!

Initially, though, good news for the company.

Thanks for the update!

 

[SIR90210]

A case thats been going on my whole life. About a yellow, stuffed bear. Apparently the plaintiffs have WAY too much time on their hands.

 

[Timekeeper]

Originally posted by kbmb

Jurist finds that plaintiffs obtained evidence improperly.

So that means Disney won on a technicality - and the plaintiffs have evidence against Disney - and it had to be thrown out because of how it was obtained?

This sounds to me like when cocaine evidence must be thrown out because it was improperly seized - such as the result of a police search without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. While I agree with the system, everyone knows that the defendant had cocaine on his person.

Catch 22?

Timekeeper

 

[sissa216]

Re: Re: Judge Ends Lawsuit Against Disney

Originally posted by Timekeeper
So that means Disney won on a technicality - and the plaintiffs have evidence against Disney - and it had to be thrown out because of how it was obtained?

So it seems to me as well. Its technically a victory according to the law, but is it almost egg on Disney's face at the same time?

 

[PeeplMoovr]

Another judge on an appeal may decide differently and allow the trial to continue, but for now...

It's unclear what evidence the plaintiffs might have against Disney. What the judge held (I think, I haven't read the entire decision), is that the court will not even entertain the merits of the case as a whole because the judge is finding the plaintiffs have violated the law and therefore the judge is throwing the case out with prejudice (meaning it can't be brought again). We might have found out what evidence there was against Disney had the trial gone on. There might have been something there that made Disney look bad, but it's all speculation since none of it (as far as I know) as gotten out, and the judge isn't making this ruling based on the content of the evidence - he or she is making ithe ruling based on the illegal methods involved in acquiring the evidence (trespassing).
Also, I think previously Disney was sanctioned for destroying documents. This decision appears to not only throw out the case, but to overturn any past sanctions imposed on Disney.

So it's good news for Disney. And us stockholders!

We'll likely never know what this "evidence" against Disney is. But I'd sure like to know!