Quote:
Originally Posted by tjinaz
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=6185492
Everyone is a hero when they are not risking anything of their own. By naming the board itself they are significantly upping the stakes. Its fine and dandy to go up against attorneys that work for municipalities and government for "the good of the people" but if you think for a minute the board will risk their personal assets against the collection of sharks Hulisizer will bring to bear you are sadly mistaken.
|
My bet is that is quite unlikely. These folks are neither neophytes, nor stupid - and they have attorneys of their own. One can 'name' anyone in a lawsuit one wishes. Keeping them named on the suit is an entirely different matter. Unless one can show why the individual named is not acting properly in his/her capacity as (say) a board member, their personal assets are safe. No different there than here. Only if the individual acts outside of such capacity would they have engaged in some form of tortious conduct.
If the City of Glendale has acted in a manner that is (ultimately) found to be illegal, ALL aspects of the deal, including the poison pill, are likely to be struck by the courts.
I would also expect that an organization of that sort (GI) carries significant D&O insurance just to cover such a risk. Operating in a public policy venue would be recognizable as a significant area of risk and would undoubtedly be insured. (Their insurers, however, may be none too pleased....)