Comments on: The Gutkowski v. Steinbrenner complaint http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/ A New York Yankees Blog Wed, 15 Feb 2012 05:17:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Glen L http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-561665 Glen L Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:07:49 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-561665 Um .. that's not correct at all. 6 years from the date of the fraud or 2 years from the discovery (or when it should have reasonably been discovered) Um .. that’s not correct at all. 6 years from the date of the fraud or 2 years from the discovery (or when it should have reasonably been discovered)

]]> By: Avi Frisch http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-561124 Avi Frisch Tue, 01 Sep 2009 01:34:22 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-561124 This complaint is weak. Aside from the obvious fact that it never actually alleges that Steinbrenner did anything more than say he wanted to hire Gutkowski, without hiring him full time, it does not explain why Gutkowski is entitled to money for an idea he willingly gave Steinbrenner. There is no legal basis for saying I owe you money after I give you my idea for free. Nor does Gutkowski explain why the amounts he was paid as a consultant were insufficient to compensate him for his work. That is of course ignoring the fact that the statute of limitations on this have clearly run. The standard statute of limitations in New York is 6 years and applies to contract actions. Even if the fraud allegation held water (it doesn't - as there does not seem to be an allegation of scienter or any act performed by Gutkowski in reliance on the fraud) it is still subject to the statute of limitations, I believe from discovery, but clearly he should have discovered by 2003 that there was no chance he was getting whatever he thought he was promised. This complaint is weak. Aside from the obvious fact that it never actually alleges that Steinbrenner did anything more than say he wanted to hire Gutkowski, without hiring him full time, it does not explain why Gutkowski is entitled to money for an idea he willingly gave Steinbrenner. There is no legal basis for saying I owe you money after I give you my idea for free. Nor does Gutkowski explain why the amounts he was paid as a consultant were insufficient to compensate him for his work.

That is of course ignoring the fact that the statute of limitations on this have clearly run. The standard statute of limitations in New York is 6 years and applies to contract actions. Even if the fraud allegation held water (it doesn’t – as there does not seem to be an allegation of scienter or any act performed by Gutkowski in reliance on the fraud) it is still subject to the statute of limitations, I believe from discovery, but clearly he should have discovered by 2003 that there was no chance he was getting whatever he thought he was promised.

]]> By: VO http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560463 VO Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:11:44 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560463 +1 +1

]]> By: nathan http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560461 nathan Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:11:22 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560461 Yep... agree.. too silly a case... too small an amount (in Steinbrenner terms...) heck they are paying Igawa 20 Mill.. if this guy indeed had some input then that is ... way more than Igawa ever did. Yep… agree.. too silly a case… too small an amount (in Steinbrenner terms…) heck they are paying Igawa 20 Mill.. if this guy indeed had some input then that is … way more than Igawa ever did.

]]> By: Benjamin Kabak http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560446 Benjamin Kabak Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:02:51 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560446 I'd put money on an out-of-court settlement. Even though I don't believe Gutkowski could win in court, the Yankees aren't going to want to take this to trial. I’d put money on an out-of-court settlement. Even though I don’t believe Gutkowski could win in court, the Yankees aren’t going to want to take this to trial.

]]> By: nathan http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560441 nathan Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:59:58 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560441 If that lawyer gets anything out of this... he wud hv provde why he is a lawyer... all "verbal" and he cud still write 21 pages of it... beyond a point i had to check whether i was reading an earlier page.. it was the same thing over and over again... i cud however see an out of court settlement though.. If that lawyer gets anything out of this… he wud hv provde why he is a lawyer… all “verbal” and he cud still write 21 pages of it… beyond a point i had to check whether i was reading an earlier page.. it was the same thing over and over again… i cud however see an out of court settlement though..

]]> By: tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Ridiculous Upside http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560420 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Ridiculous Upside Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:48:50 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560420 I have a tattoo of two raised gloved fists on my shoulder. Checkmate. I have a tattoo of two raised gloved fists on my shoulder.

Checkmate.

]]> By: tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Ridiculous Upside http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560419 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Ridiculous Upside Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:47:35 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560419 Here, I'll boil it down for you to all that you really need to know: If Chewbacca is from Endor, you must acquit. Here, I’ll boil it down for you to all that you really need to know:

If Chewbacca is from Endor, you must acquit.

]]> By: tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Ridiculous Upside http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560418 tommiesmithjohncarlos a/k/a Ridiculous Upside Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:46:54 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560418 http://riveraveblues.com/2009/01/open-thread-excerpting-the-yankee-years-7318/#comment-267953 http://riveraveblues.com/2009/.....ent-267953

]]> By: Matt ACTY/BBD http://riveraveblues.com/2009/08/the-gutkowski-v-steinbrenner-complaint-16568/#comment-560417 Matt ACTY/BBD Mon, 31 Aug 2009 22:45:58 +0000 http://riveraveblues.com/?p=16568#comment-560417 pat, the guy can be killed by throwing water at him. How did you not see that? pat, the guy can be killed by throwing water at him. How did you not see that?

]]>