Erin Andrews wins $55 million lawsuit

[URY914]

"A jury has awarded Erin Andrews $55 million as a result of her lawsuit against a Nashville Marriott and a man who took and posted a video of her.
Andrews was asking for $75 million in her civil suit vs. West End Hotel Partners, which operates the Marriott at Vanderbilt, and Michael David Barrett, who tampered with her hotel room's peephole to record a video of her while she was in her hotel room. Barrett then posted the video online in 2009.

The jury found Barrett 51-percent responsible and the hotel to be 49-percent responsible, meaning Barrett is on the hook for approximately $28 million in damages while the hotel is ordered to pay $26 million."

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/erin-andrews-awarded--55-million-in-hotel-stalking-case-230236018.html

Seems a little over the top to me.

[stomachmonkey]

Well she'll never see Barrett's $28M.

Marriott will appeal their $26M.

Curious, the attorneys likely worked on contingency.

Do they get a cut of the full award or only what she's able to collect?

If the former and they get 1/3rd she'll only see ~$10M.

[berettafan]

So what made the hotel responsible?

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by berettafan

So what made the hotel responsible?

The American legal system and that's it. Jackpot justice at its finest.

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by berettafan

So what made the hotel responsible?

I've been wondering that myself. They did let the guy scam them into putting him in a room next to her, but was that really a foreseeable event that they should have prevented?

[URY914]

Originally Posted by berettafan

So what made the hotel responsible?

It has to do with the hotel giving out there room number and told the guy she was staying there. Or something a long those lines.

[widebody911]

I downloaded the video, out of curiosity. What a waste of 20Mb; I want my electrons back. Interestingly, there's a lot of fakes of this out there, some (most) of which are actually better than the original.

[rusnak]

For $10M I'd show my nudie pics and be happy doing it. Money makes it all better.

[sc_rufctr]

$55 million ... That's ridiculous! How do they come up with these figures?

[Tobra]

Originally Posted by berettafan

So what made the hotel responsible?

Deep pockets

[M.D. Holloway]

It is repugnant that someone would video anyone in such a position and then look to profit from it. I was shown the video and if that was someone I cared about I would have a serious problem with who videoed it. Is the hotel culpable ? Maybe that they didn't provide the proper security? That the guy that videoed it was in cahoots with the hotel?

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Well she'll never see Barrett's $28M.

Marriott will appeal their $26M.

Curious, the attorneys likely worked on contingency.

Do they get a cut of the full award or only what she's able to collect?

If the former and they get 1/3rd she'll only see ~$10M.

If they got paid on the award, rather than on what's actually collected, who would pay it?

"Hey Erin, great news we won, now get out your checkbook you owe us $10 million."

[Porsche-O-Phile]

As with most things in civil law, the only "winners" are the lawyers. She'll be likely to see Dollar #1 after the legal fees.

[sc_rufctr]

I just saw the "video". Obviously a very attractive lady who looks after herself.

Like anybody she deserves her privacy but this was about stalking so I guess that had a lot to do with the judgement.
And lets be honest. The video would appeal to voyeurs so that makes it especially creepy.

I wish her the best.

[berettafan]

Originally Posted by sc_rufctr

I just saw the "video".




The video would appeal to voyeurs so that makes it especially creepy.

A little irony?

[widgeon13]

Wonder how accurate this analysis is?

Erin Andrews: How $55 Million Gets Whittled Away ... to $6 Mil | TMZ.com

[sc_rufctr]

Originally Posted by berettafan

A little irony?

Not at all. More curious than anything else and after the result of the law suit I had to see what all the fuss was about.

If anything this will help her career. I'd never heard of her before this. She may even get a book deal and mini series.
I'd be surprised if someone hasn't contacted her already.

[URY914]

I've mentioned the verdict to my wife and had a discussion about it in the office with several women involved and seen a couple of comments from women in the media plus read the comments at the bottom of the on-line stories. Women seem to be 100% or more in favor of the verdict. Men not so much.

It is a video of her walking around nude. Not having sex with herself or others, we didn't find out she is really a man, so not really anything scandalous by today's standards. This sort of thing happens pretty regular these days.

I just don't see the "damage" done. It doesn't seem to have effected her career. She still does what she did before and makes a pretty good living at it.

The story said the jury was posing for pics and getting her autograph after the trial. I'd say this would be grounds for an appeal or something.

And also I cannot stand her voice. It is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.

[GH85Carrera]

I started to look for the link to the video just to see how bad or good of an image one can even get looking into a room through a peephole. It must be pretty bad. In the end I was too lazy to mess with finding it. I have seen other naked women. She is pretty but not worth the effort. I had never heard of her before this story.

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

She is pretty but not worth the effort. I had never heard of her before this story.

Ditto