|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Oct 20, 2021 11:35:16 GMT -8
FWIW, I am not saying that *I* would use this as an excuse. I am vaccinated, I just saw lots of folks wondering what possible religious excemption there could be. And the fetal tissue issue is it. Also saw this morning that Rolo is indeed suing WSU and the state of washington and is citing his religious freedoms are being violated. I read a really brief article and as is typical in the legal profession the suit is trying to "fog" the real issue with unrelated past circumstances that have nothing to do with his religious "freedoms". The firing issue is all that matters here, did he follow the mutually agreed employment contract? He gave the University cause and he lost his gamble. Rolo's attorney must have convinced him he'll get some type of settlement from the State/University as there is no way any court could accept his argument and give him a "win". The State would be overrun with lawsuits. Good. Looking forward to the public disclosure of Rolovich’s specific exemption request. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Oct 20, 2021 11:45:52 GMT -8
I read a really brief article and as is typical in the legal profession the suit is trying to "fog" the real issue with unrelated past circumstances that have nothing to do with his religious "freedoms". The firing issue is all that matters here, did he follow the mutually agreed employment contract? He gave the University cause and he lost his gamble. Rolo's attorney must have convinced him he'll get some type of settlement from the State/University as there is no way any court could accept his argument and give him a "win". The State would be overrun with lawsuits. Good. Looking forward to the public disclosure of Rolovich’s specific exemption request. One other thing, the lawyer statement says the firing was based on Rolovich’s exemption request not being accepted so it never even got to the “accommodation” stage. At this point the focus moves from Pullman to Olympia. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 20, 2021 11:50:35 GMT -8
Good. Looking forward to the public disclosure of Rolovich’s specific exemption request. One other thing, the lawyer statement says the firing was based on Rolovich’s exemption request not being accepted so it never even got to the “accommodation” stage. At this point the focus moves from Pullman to Olympia. Which you would think makes it almost a moot point to pursue?? I guess their thinking is include as much extraneous garbage as possible, with multiple agencies, and see what type of settlement they can get to go away. Seems on the surface to be a giant waste of whatever money the family has, but to each their own! |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 20, 2021 12:17:53 GMT -8
Good. Looking forward to the public disclosure of Rolovich’s specific exemption request. One other thing, the lawyer statement says the firing was based on Rolovich’s exemption request not being accepted so it never even got to the “accommodation” stage. At this point the focus moves from Pullman to Olympia. So it will be a challenge to the legality of the mandate and more smoke and mirrors. Typical. I bet he was contacted by several lawyers as soon as he went public. We all knew it was coming to this. |
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Oct 20, 2021 12:36:42 GMT -8
FWIW, I am not saying that *I* would use this as an excuse. I am vaccinated, I just saw lots of folks wondering what possible religious excemption there could be. And the fetal tissue issue is it. Also saw this morning that Rolo is indeed suing WSU and the state of washington and is citing his religious freedoms are being violated. I read a really brief article and as is typical in the legal profession the suit is trying to "fog" the real issue with unrelated past circumstances that have nothing to do with his religious "freedoms". The firing issue is all that matters here, did he follow the mutually agreed employment contract? He gave the University cause and he lost his gamble. Rolo's attorney must have convinced him he'll get some type of settlement from the State/University as there is no way any court could accept his argument and give him a "win". The State would be overrun with lawsuits. I think you are right. Throw all kinds of accusations out to all kinds of different parties to get a settlement. A money grab. Rololololo is being sued by a former player for discrimination. He needs some $ for his legal defense fund. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Oct 20, 2021 12:37:22 GMT -8
Good. Looking forward to the public disclosure of Rolovich’s specific exemption request. One other thing, the lawyer statement says the firing was based on Rolovich’s exemption request not being accepted so it never even got to the “accommodation” stage. At this point the focus moves from Pullman to Olympia. That still doesn't fully clear it up. The exemption request still could have been approved, but Chun could have determined that he could not do his jobs with accomodations. The exemption includes both parts. It is a two pronged approval process. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Oct 20, 2021 13:28:19 GMT -8
One other thing, the lawyer statement says the firing was based on Rolovich’s exemption request not being accepted so it never even got to the “accommodation” stage. At this point the focus moves from Pullman to Olympia. That still doesn't fully clear it up. The exemption request still could have been approved, but Chun could have determined that he could not do his jobs with accomodations. The exemption includes both parts. It is a two pronged approval process. The lawyer’s statement said the exemption request wasn’t approved. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Oct 20, 2021 13:37:34 GMT -8
That still doesn't fully clear it up. The exemption request still could have been approved, but Chun could have determined that he could not do his jobs with accomodations. The exemption includes both parts. It is a two pronged approval process. The lawyer’s statement said the exemption request wasn’t approved. And the AD since accomodations couldn't be made. It doesn't really matter. He could have been fired for either part. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 20, 2021 14:33:26 GMT -8
I read a really brief article and as is typical in the legal profession the suit is trying to "fog" the real issue with unrelated past circumstances that have nothing to do with his religious "freedoms". The firing issue is all that matters here, did he follow the mutually agreed employment contract? He gave the University cause and he lost his gamble. Rolo's attorney must have convinced him he'll get some type of settlement from the State/University as there is no way any court could accept his argument and give him a "win". The State would be overrun with lawsuits. I think you are right. Throw all kinds of accusations out to all kinds of different parties to get a settlement. A money grab. Rololololo is being sued by a former player for discrimination. He needs some $ for his legal defense fund. Funny thing, it seems Rolo doesn't like being told what to do. But, if I read the brief article on the player lawsuit he's a huge hypocrite. I believe part of that suit Rolo told the player he could not be part of a particular social justice movement?! To basically clean out his locker because of it. Seems what goes 'round come 'round! |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Oct 20, 2021 14:38:28 GMT -8
That still doesn't fully clear it up. The exemption request still could have been approved, but Chun could have determined that he could not do his jobs with accomodations. The exemption includes both parts. It is a two pronged approval process. The lawyer’s statement said the exemption request wasn’t approved. I haven't really done a lot of employment law, but it makes a lot more sense that the exemption was not approved than the parties being unable to reach a reasonable accommodation. In order to receive the exemption, Rolo would have to prove that he has a sincere individual belief that he cannot take the COVID-19 vaccine. I mean, all you would basically have to do is show that he got a flu shot as an adult once upon a time. Then, it would be Rolo's burden to show why all three COVID-19 vaccines are different than the shot that he received. Or Rolo would have to prove some sort of religious conversion after his last flu shot. The suit will be public, but, since healthcare is an issue, I would imagine that HIPAA will keep a lot of the suit private. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Oct 20, 2021 14:45:30 GMT -8
I think you are right. Throw all kinds of accusations out to all kinds of different parties to get a settlement. A money grab. Rololololo is being sued by a former player for discrimination. He needs some $ for his legal defense fund. Funny thing, it seems Rolo doesn't like being told what to do. But, if I read the brief article on the player lawsuit he's a huge hypocrite. I believe part of that suit Rolo told the player he could not be part of a particular social justice movement?! To basically clean out his locker because of it. Seems what goes 'round come 'round! None of this seems particularly funny. I have been doing both plaintiff and defense work for 14+ years now. This may blow your mind, but all of the allegations in a Complaint often are not factual. You have to plead enough to get your causes of action past a Motion to Dismiss and, then, you can get into discovery, where the defense is usually more eager to settle. A lot of time, you only get one Motion for Summary Judgment, so parties wait to file those until after discovery concludes. I mean, don't believe everything that you read on the internet. Or in the news. Or in preliminary pleadings. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Oct 20, 2021 15:26:10 GMT -8
Funny thing, it seems Rolo doesn't like being told what to do. But, if I read the brief article on the player lawsuit he's a huge hypocrite. I believe part of that suit Rolo told the player he could not be part of a particular social justice movement?! To basically clean out his locker because of it. Seems what goes 'round come 'round! None of this seems particularly funny. I have been doing both plaintiff and defense work for 14+ years now. This may blow your mind, but all of the allegations in a Complaint often are not factual. You have to plead enough to get your causes of action past a Motion to Dismiss and, then, you can get into discovery, where the defense is usually more eager to settle. A lot of time, you only get one Motion for Summary Judgment, so parties wait to file those until after discovery concludes. I mean, don't believe everything that you read on the internet. Or in the news. Or in preliminary pleadings. Ummm... not quite sure where the foundation of your post emanates from mine?? In each case I discussed the brevity of the articles and implied no research or "belief" in said articles. As far as "funny"? Completely dumbfounded where I indicated I was finding humor in the situation. I guess my earlier post and assumption of typical legalese "fogging" issues may apply to your latest reach. Your experience may or may not be applicable in Rolo's situation. However, your post was better served on it's own vs being a quote of my post! |
|
