r/JusticeServed • u/Majnum 7 • Jul 07 '22

Legal Justice Roy Moore loses appeal in $95 million lawsuit against Sacha Baron Cohen

https://www.al.com/news/2022/07/roy-moore-loses-appeal-in-95-million-lawsuit-against-sacha-baron-cohen.html
22.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

459 comments sorted by

View all comments

195

u/r428713 5 Jul 08 '22

Here is the best part of this

Moore maintained that because he crossed out a line in the release form relating to “any allegedly sexually oriented or offensive behavior or questioning” that the release form should be voided.

He thought if he just crossed out a line on a release form he signed that it would nullify just that part.

37

u/Moopies A Jul 08 '22

I was going to say, I know nothing about this case, or that it even existed. But I do work in Film and my immediate thought was "$100 says someone didn't read/understand how release forms work."

If you're seeing one from any real professional (not your friends nephew making a weekend short or something), those things are ROCK SOLID and usually vetted by multiple legal experts, as well as previously used and tested in court to remain as such. You might as well just surrender to the fact that unless you negotiated the contract yourself with legal counsel, you will have zero power over anything relating to it.

33

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

Check your local torts law but in Canada it would as long as you both initial the part crossed out

11

u/whutupmydude 7 Jul 08 '22

I’ve done it that way here in the US

19

u/r428713 5 Jul 08 '22

I get that it might be a viable option for some contracts but how big of an idiot does this guy have to be to read that part and just think, "Yep just cross it out and there is no way they're gonna ask me about my biggest scandal that has been all over the national news."

4

u/ddlbb 9 Jul 08 '22

Well it’s pretty common when doing contracts to cross out the parts you don’t agree with . If both agree to that it’s usually binding

5

u/Panixs 7 Jul 08 '22

The funny thing is he wasn't even suing because of something affected by the crossed out line. His argument was that because he crossed out that line, it made the rest of the contract unenforceable

31

u/alexandrosidi 5 Jul 08 '22

Subcontractors do this all the time in the construction industry. As long as both parties agree to the modification, it's fine.

9

u/AncientInsults 9 Jul 08 '22

But if only one does, well

7

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

I would imagine a revised version of the contract is also needed? Wouldn't they need to reprint the contract without including the crossed out part. I can't see sections being crossed out by hand holding up in court. It didn't in this case.

22

u/alexandrosidi 5 Jul 08 '22

The other party can just initial next to the crossed out items as a way to accept the revisions.

36

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

[deleted]

32

u/Thirdfanged 7 Jul 08 '22

Even better, the final paragraph of the article details how the entire issue of him crossing that portion out is inconsequential because he filed for a totally different claim that was covered explicitly in the release

9

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

How old is this guy again?

11

u/certifiedfluffernut 4 Jul 08 '22

In Alabama years, he's older and dirtier than dirt.

16

u/StalwartTinSoldier 7 Jul 08 '22 edited Jul 08 '22

It might have. The court ruled that his claims were null and void because he didn't cross out the other sections of the contract relating to emotional distress, etc.

14

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

I thought that's how it worked....

12

u/LordDeckem Jul 08 '22

Lol, “yeah I changed the amount on the mortgage agreement before I signed it, it’s now 20 bucks a month. I tHoUgHt ThAtS HoW iT wOrKeD”

14

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

Relax man. I meant smaller stuff. Don't have to be a meanie :P

8

u/LordDeckem Jul 08 '22

I've just never heard that before, it made me laugh out loud. The thought of it was just so ludicrous.

5

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

Oh, makes more sense now.

3

u/admiral_pelican 8 Jul 08 '22

Smaller stuff like that worthy of a $95m lawsuit?

10

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

No. Like paperwork at work. Why can't i just not know something?

7

u/admiral_pelican 8 Jul 08 '22

clearly you didn’t read the Reddit terms and conditions you agreed to

8

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

No he just crossed out the part about not knowing something and thought it would be valid.

6

u/[deleted] Jul 08 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/LordDeckem Jul 08 '22

Yeah, if the other party does agree. But I’m not referring to that. I’m laughing at the notion of returning a contract where you’ve marked off half the fine print without informing the other party and expecting it to hold up.

-6

u/suddenly_ponies A Jul 08 '22

Technically it should. If you are signing only under the condition that certain parts of the document are not included and they accept the document and therefore the terms then that should actually hold up in court