(Total Views: 893)
Posted On: 02/21/2022 12:32:29 PM
Post# of 148878
This is worth sharing. From Aaron on YMB:
Aaron32 minutes ago
"Wilful malfeasance is difficult to prove as you have to show what was inside someone mind. To prove someone wilfully was malicious becomes a very subjective concept as you argue they performed certain inept procedures to purposefully destroy Cytodyn's chances.
Bashers know this and are only too happy to have longs dreaming of proving wilful malfeasance.
The great news is the Bashers and Amarex cannot hide behind the difficulties of proving wilful malfeasance.
The MSA section 9.3 specifies tort damages can be sought if the conditions of gross negligence OR wilful malfeasance exist.
Don't discount gross negligence. Kazem Kazempour can be the most innocent bystander in history, simply making egregious errors (like ignoring agreed upon analysis protocol even with 30 years of experience including working for the FDA himself behind him) and still Amarex would be open to tort proceeding.
Much easier to prove gross negligence. Just needs preponderance of evidence and expert testimony.
Sidley will probably try to prove both so if they fail to prove wilful malfeasance, they will still prevail for gross negligence."
Aaron32 minutes ago
"Wilful malfeasance is difficult to prove as you have to show what was inside someone mind. To prove someone wilfully was malicious becomes a very subjective concept as you argue they performed certain inept procedures to purposefully destroy Cytodyn's chances.
Bashers know this and are only too happy to have longs dreaming of proving wilful malfeasance.
The great news is the Bashers and Amarex cannot hide behind the difficulties of proving wilful malfeasance.
The MSA section 9.3 specifies tort damages can be sought if the conditions of gross negligence OR wilful malfeasance exist.
Don't discount gross negligence. Kazem Kazempour can be the most innocent bystander in history, simply making egregious errors (like ignoring agreed upon analysis protocol even with 30 years of experience including working for the FDA himself behind him) and still Amarex would be open to tort proceeding.
Much easier to prove gross negligence. Just needs preponderance of evidence and expert testimony.
Sidley will probably try to prove both so if they fail to prove wilful malfeasance, they will still prevail for gross negligence."
(9)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
