Sarkisian Suing USC

S

Schrute

Assistant __ ___ Regional Mod
If he wins can everyone in California just start showing up for work shit-faced, blame it on depression and either not get fired or expect to win a mega lawsuit?

If so, here I come San Diego!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
I suppose he's not looking to coach another DI squad anytime soon...
 
Steve Sarkisian is taking USC to court.
The former Trojans coach has filed a lawsuit against his ex-employer, according to the Los Angeles Times, contending that the school broke the law by firing an employee due to his disability -- alcoholism.
Sarkisian is asking for more than $30 million, according to a report from TMZ.
"Alcoholism is a recognized disability under California law," Sarkisian's lawyer, Alan Loewinsohn, told TMZ. "So firing somebody because of that disability is against the law."
Sarkisian was fired in October after he allegedly showed up to work inebriated. It was also allged that he was intoxicated during the Arizona State game. This all came after heapologized for his "behavior" and "inappropriate language" at USC's season kick-off event.
The former coach claimed he found out he was fired via email. USC athletic director Pat Haden initially placed Sarkisian on an indefinite leave of absence, saying at the time it was clear to him that Sarkisian "is not healthy."
In the lawsuit, Sarkisian says he has completed a stint in rehab and he is "sober and ready to return to coaching."
Sarkisian was in the midst of his second season at USC with three years remaining on his contraact. He led the Trojans to a 12-6 in 18 games.
 
he didn't fire him b/c of his disability. he fired him because he didn't show up for practice and was incapable of doing his job. what a fucking asshole sark is.
 
This guy being drunk at games he's head coaching is a true classic, you must admit.
 
I drink more than I should, but I think I could get it together for a few hours to coach USC.
 
i predict they settle for an undisclosed sum that is FAR lower than the 30 mil his lawyer says he is seeking - probably in the neighborhood of 8 mil give or take. if sark's camp does not accept a settlement, and it actually goes to a civil court in front of a jury, all the partying/drinking/philandering he probably did it his whole time at SC will be fair game and the proverbial gloves will be off.

haden gave him a zero-tolerance policy after the incident in the preseason, and sark violated. this will not play well for sark in front of a jury and his lawyer knows it.
 
some of you who are criticizing him are way off base. this is America - everyone sues, especially when the defendant is an entity with deep pockets like USC.
 
majent said:
i predict they settle for an undisclosed sum that is FAR lower than the 30 mil his lawyer says he is seeking - probably in the neighborhood of 8 mil give or take. if sark's camp does not accept a settlement, and it actually goes to a civil court in front of a jury, all the partying/drinking/philandering he probably did it his whole time at SC will be fair game and the proverbial gloves will be off.

haden gave him a zero-tolerance policy after the incident in the preseason, and sark violated. this will not play well for sark in front of a jury and his lawyer knows it.
Click to expand...

majent said:
some of you who are criticizing him are way off base. this is America - everyone sues, especially when the defendant is an entity with deep pockets like USC.
Click to expand...

as much as it sucks, what you say is true.
 
Carolina Guy said:
this is probably based off of him realizing he won't be getting a job anytime soon.
Click to expand...

absolutely agree. and best believe that his next contract coaching (which won't be for a few years at least) will include clauses protecting the school or organization from being sued if he is terminated for any reason. if he won't agree to it then he won't be coaching at any FBS or NFL level. he'll be coaching at a local HS instead.
 
Every shiftless drunk in America is awaiting the outcome of this one.
 
TheGarfather said:
The guy is a loser and the suit should be dismissed with prejudice on the basis of it being non-sense.
Click to expand...

Alcohol is described often as a disease and in CA is considered a disability according to what some have posted. Based on this the lawsuit has some legs and is actually a sound financial decision based on several factors.
 
I don't care about California's laws or what basis there is to justify it. I hope it gets discarded and he is thrown out on the street but that is what should happen. This would be almost - but not quite - as dumb as Mike Bellotti continuing to receive money through the state of Oregon's retirement plan.
 
majent said:
Alcohol is described often as a disease and in CA is considered a disability according to what some have posted. Based on this the lawsuit has some legs and is actually a sound financial decision based on several factors.
Click to expand...
again, who created this "disability"? He can look in the mirror for that. It wasn't USC. They have plenty of ammo that he was feeding this "disability" during work hours, and, while he was coaching games and practices. They gave him help and boundaries and he violated those boundaries.

and this "disability" surely pre-dates USC. Why isn't he suing Washington while he's at it for creating this monster?

what a joke this whole thing is and what a POS he is - take responsibility for your own actions Sark.
 
SC gonna fight it...good for them. This a-hole doesn't deserve a penny.

---

In a statement Monday, USC general counsel Carol Mauch Amir said Sarkisian "mischaracterized" the facts and the school will "defend these claims vigorously."

"Much of what is stated in the lawsuit filed today by Steve Sarkisian is patently untrue," the statement read. "The record will show that Mr. Sarkisian repeatedly denied to university officials that he had a problem with alcohol, never asked for time off to get help and resisted university efforts to provide him with help. The university made clear in writing that further incidents would result in termination, as it did."
 
If he has attorneys worth their weight in salt, he'll get a settlement in the millions. I'm not agreeing w it. It's just the way it is. The system is set to for the plaintiff to get paid off so he goes away.
 
TheGarfather said:
I don't care about California's laws or what basis there is to justify it. I hope it gets discarded and he is thrown out on the street but that is what should happen. This would be almost - but not quite - as dumb as Mike Bellotti continuing to receive money through the state of Oregon's retirement plan.
Click to expand...

WOW. I hadn't heard about this and read up yesterday...just unbelievable.
 
majent said:
If he has attorneys worth their weight in salt, he'll get a settlement in the millions. I'm not agreeing w it. It's just the way it is. The system is set to for the plaintiff to get paid off so he goes away.
Click to expand...
if this thing goes to civil court he's going to lose, so if you're USC why go for settlement?

i say lose as if i'm a law expert like Fondyyy..but i'm pretty confident in it
 
P-Unit said:
again, who created this "disability"? He can look in the mirror for that. It wasn't USC. They have plenty of ammo that he was feeding this "disability" during work hours, and, while he was coaching games and practices. They gave him help and boundaries and he violated those boundaries.

and this "disability" surely pre-dates USC. Why isn't he suing Washington while he's at it for creating this monster?

what a joke this whole thing is and what a POS he is - take responsibility for your own actions Sark.
Click to expand...

Washington didnt fire him for it

he's suing them for firing him because of a disability, wasn't he on his way to rehab when he got his notice?

he's going to get a settlement
 
guaranteeed said:
Washington didnt fire him for it

he's suing them for firing him because of a disability, wasn't he on his way to rehab when he got his notice?

he's going to get a settlement
Click to expand...

could he argue this "disability" was created at Washington whether they fired him or not? Then he could go after them. Why stop at USC? Sounds ridiculous, right?

The whole thing is BS.
 
gsro said:
if this thing goes to civil court he's going to lose, so if you're USC why go for settlement?

i say lose as if i'm a law expert like Fondyyy..but i'm pretty confident in it
Click to expand...

because if it goes to court then all of the crap he did at Wash (ie drinking in the locker room and/or his office with a personal fridge etc) will come out and USC will have egg all over its face for not vetting him out properly before hiring him. they have fault in this as well and they will look extremely bad publicly.

trust me, there are plenty of organizations, companies, just entities in general, who had very strong cases on their side but decided to settle because going to trial costs a ton of money and there is the potential for bad publicity which now is more than ever with social media. most large organizations opt to settle to make it go away and they have the plaintiff sign a release that they cannot discuss the case with anyone except their attorney, spouse, and tax consultant. if they violate it then they pay a fine.

i'm not an attorney but i know a shit ton about how these cases work.
 
So let me get this straight. In California, since alcoholism is considered a disability, a school bus driver, airline pilot or surgeon can't be fired if they continually show up for work drunk? I think you could probably find some parents, passengers & patients that might frown on that statute. I also find it humorous that Sarkisian obviously has an extremely severe, long standing problem, but less than two months later he says he's better & ready for action, at least the civil kind.
 
yep, everyone prob had at least one drunk for a teacher. I know I did. Put your sunglasses on and get through it without being a little bitch.
 
P-Unit said:
could he argue this "disability" was created at Washington whether they fired him or not? Then he could go after them. Why stop at USC? Sounds ridiculous, right?

The whole thing is BS.
Click to expand...

if USC did it's due diligence they hired him in spite of his disability. It's doubtful Haden did
 
majent said:
because if it goes to court then all of the crap he did at Wash (ie drinking in the locker room and/or his office with a personal fridge etc) will come out and USC will have egg all over its face for not vetting him out properly before hiring him. they have fault in this as well and they will look extremely bad publicly.

trust me, there are plenty of organizations, companies, just entities in general, who had very strong cases on their side but decided to settle because going to trial costs a ton of money and there is the potential for bad publicity which now is more than ever with social media. most large organizations opt to settle to make it go away and they have the plaintiff sign a release that they cannot discuss the case with anyone except their attorney, spouse, and tax consultant. if they violate it then they pay a fine.

i'm not an attorney but i know a shit ton about how these cases work.
Click to expand...

publicity is too late...Sark did what he wanted and put USC and Haden at the fore front of a civil case even if it doesn't go...it got the attention it needed.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but I don't think the university has anymore to lose than what it already has with this coming public. Settling is only beneficial, before anything hits the fan, but it's too late now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

steponaduck
NCAA FB RSW DISCUSSION
2 3
Replies
104
Views
3K
spottie2935
spottie2935
steponaduck
NCAA FB WEEK 9
Replies
10
Views
490
steponaduck
steponaduck
HUNT
BIG Week 2 discussion
2
Replies
66
Views
2K
HUNT
HUNT
PappyOSU
Pappy’s Picks CFB week 7
Replies
6
Views
547
PappyOSU
PappyOSU
bones
  • Locked
ESPN's Handicappers Picks Week #13
Replies
42
Views
2K
bones
bones
Back
Top