Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I think this is a realistic view of the situation. But how can the estate file bankruptcy just to protect against the civil suit? Are there other factors/claims? This should be interesting to follow. I'm sure they have thought of all the angles..... The suit is not really because the Pats have done anything wrong, but that they may be the holders of the assets.

 

Where are our resident lawyers? I promise not to tell any lawyer jokes!

 

 

 

I thought that was so obvious it went without stating, but I guess one can't be too safe.

The estate fiduciary (Executor/Administrator) typically has a duty to pursue and amass all estate assets. Assuming that the Patriots still owe Hernandez some portion of his contract wages, the fiduciary is required to pursue them.

 

An estate cannot declare bankruptcy in the same way an individual or entity may. If it is insolvent because its debts or claims against it exceed its assets, then the estate is insolvent, and the various claims against it are apportioned according to the laws governing priority of claims.

 

It's conceivable that this is the thinking behind the suit. The Patriots will likely argue that Hernandez's conduct obviates or breaches their contract in some way, and the wage claim, and therefore the claim against the estate, might thereafter be settled quietly and confidentially for a greater than zero (albeit less than sought) sum in order for the club to avoid bad press.

 

But, I'm not admitted in Massachusetts or all that familiar with the details of its laws, so this is just generalized and wild speculation based on New York jurisprudence.

Posted

The estate fiduciary (Executor/Administrator) typically has a duty to pursue and amass all estate assets. Assuming that the Patriots still owe Hernandez some portion of his contract wages, the fiduciary is required to pursue them.

 

An estate cannot declare bankruptcy in the same way an individual or entity may. If it is insolvent because its debts or claims against it exceed its assets, then the estate is insolvent, and the various claims against it are apportioned according to the laws governing priority of claims.

 

It's conceivable that this is the thinking behind the suit. The Patriots will likely argue that Hernandez's conduct obviates or breaches their contract in some way, and the wage claim, and therefore the claim against the estate, might thereafter be settled quietly and confidentially for a greater than zero (albeit less than sought) sum in order for the club to avoid bad press.

 

But, I'm not admitted in Massachusetts or all that familiar with the details of its laws, so this is just generalized and wild speculation based on New York jurisprudence.

Great stuff and thanks for shedding some light on it!!
Posted (edited)

The estate fiduciary (Executor/Administrator) typically has a duty to pursue and amass all estate assets. Assuming that the Patriots still owe Hernandez some portion of his contract wages, the fiduciary is required to pursue them.

 

An estate cannot declare bankruptcy in the same way an individual or entity may. If it is insolvent because its debts or claims against it exceed its assets, then the estate is insolvent, and the various claims against it are apportioned according to the laws governing priority of claims.

 

It's conceivable that this is the thinking behind the suit. The Patriots will likely argue that Hernandez's conduct obviates or breaches their contract in some way, and the wage claim, and therefore the claim against the estate, might thereafter be settled quietly and confidentially for a greater than zero (albeit less than sought) sum in order for the club to avoid bad press.

 

But, I'm not admitted in Massachusetts or all that familiar with the details of its laws, so this is just generalized and wild speculation based on New York jurisprudence.

....thanks for ringing in and sharing your legal knowledge....interesting stuff.....if I understand MA law, his death prior to exhausting all appeals voids all convictions and technically he is innocent...IF that interpretation is somewhat correct, Patriots defense of breach of contract or implied duties does not hold because MA law says he is innocent.....

Edited by OldTimeAFLGuy
Posted

As much as I despise Kraft and his patriots*, trying to get money from them for Hernadez' crimes would be like the Goldman's suing the Bills because of OJ.

That is an interesting way of looking at it. But then the Bills didn't owe OJ any monies, otherwise they the Goldman's probably would have sued the Bills.

Posted

 

No, his convictions were vacated, meaning he maintains his innocence by a priori legal assumption. That is not even remotely the same thing as "found not guilty."

Did you even read the article? He was found not guilty for the drive by shooting of the two men, a separate incident from the Lloyd murder which he was found guilty.

Posted (edited)

gotta sue some...err...everybody. It's the American Dream to have a loved one killed by an entity of some sort with deep pockets. Of course, they are doing this for justice, not money. Obviously.

Edited by jeremy2020
Posted

He was found not guilty and is apparently not guilty of all the crimes according to mass law. So I'd say no

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Two things:

 

1). OJ was found Innocent and yet lost the civil case - they are very different and guilty or innocent does not necessarily mean anything in the civil case.

 

2). I think the lawsuit is about money the Pats owe to Hernandez as much as anything else and this lawsuit gives them grounds to collect money before it gets to the Hernandez estate.

 

I have no issues with this suit, but it depends upon the final interpretation.

As much as I despise Kraft and his patriots*, trying to get money from them for Hernadez' crimes would be like the Goldman's suing the Bills because of OJ.

If OJ had still been under contract - they probably would have to prevent the money going someplace they can not access.

 

Even as it was OJ was found Not Guilty, but still lost the civil suit and was forced to pay a lot of money.

Posted

A family that has never had crap, because they never worked for crap, trying to get a lot of crap for nothing.

 

No el surpriso.

×
×
  • Create New...