I'm not speaking to Bob's litigation, which I know nothing about. So, this post has nothing to do with that.
But just talking about lawsuits in general, the idea that because you received a settlement that means your claim has merit is not always true. Sometimes it is, but in many cases it is not. Claims are often settled because it would cost more to take them to trial (even if you win) than it would be to settle them. Plus, if you have insurance and the insurer has to cover some of the liability, they may force you to settle whether you, as the individual, want to or not.
In a showbiz lawsuit, the corporations involved may settle for business reasons even if the artists would like to fight it tooth and nail until the end, just on principle. Sometimes one party has to indemnify the other and pay off any liability they may have, so often a co-defendant may force you to settle. They don't care about your good name and your honor. They just want to stop risk exposure.
A settlement alone doesn't mean your claim had validity.
Take this AEG case v. The Jacksons. I'm sure that will settle eventually. That doesn't mean that Michael Jackson wasn't responsible for his own death. It just means that AEG will, at some point, get tired of the publicity.
Michele
|