asalaw
Master Member
Bingo. If they had just told the media there were "creative differences," her case would be much harder to prove.
Kathleen Kennedy is stepping down
- Thread starter joberg
- Start date
I remember a local case where they were digging through company emails for evidence of some scandal, and came across this context-free exchange:
"You'd better eliminate the evidence.
""Evidence eliminated!
"It was entered as evidence, but it was determined it could not be differentiated from a "there are donuts in the boardroom" type of situation.
Last edited:
TKSteve
Well-Known Member
This will be a day long remembered.Yep, you've read right: Kathleen Kennedy (71) is stepping down at the end of this year...finally
No words on her replacement.
At a place where I worked, I opened an official-looking email that appeared to be from a Swedish court, with a PDF attached. I opened it and read the top of the first page to try to figure out who it was meant for. I quickly realized it wasn’t supposed to have been sent to my company at all - and the content was clearly privileged information. I deleted it immediately and emptied the trash. It had been sent to an inbox accessible by roughly 100 people.
Is it a huge deal? Maybe not - but still...
Anyone who has ever worked in IT will tell you that dumb floats to the top. Because dumb is highly associated genetically with false confidence. False confidence will move you up the food chain faster that Chipotles travels through a human body. I will say it again, anyone who has worked in IT and most who have worked in HR have seen the most belligerent, most awkwardly common sense defying insanity in executives. They get so cocky confident and bullet proof you would think they were on a Tequila IV drip. Over the years I have worked in most major specialty IT departments. Support was bad enough when you listened to the president of a company say, for the seventh time in a month, "I was told that deleting stuff off my phone did NOT delete it from my inbox but it is gone.... AGAIN." And the response was always, the same, you are set to remote email, it is not on your phone. You are accessing the actual inbox on the server and deleting the email will delete the email.... will delete the email.... will delete the email.... anyway, ya, I'll restore your inbox. But in Backups and Recovery, you get the same Exec calling asking for that file he can't seem to find and wants to export (the entire company sales directory of current customers and no that isn't just an internet legend) or to ask "how do I delete something so that it CANNOT be restored", which cause most phone connections to spontaneously combust forcing the Exec to push that same question on 7 techs until he gets that one idiot who thinks that doing this embezzler a favor will get him somewhere. But we all know that the actual trick was to delete the evidence out of existence and then to formally open a ticket to restore the information so that you can blame it on the tech that deleted it. "Why would I open a ticket to find or restore the data if I am the one that asked for it to be deleted? That is insanity." Then we move into Data Loss Prevention, trying to keep the espionage from happening. Same exec is calling asking why he himself cannot move this sensitive data off into an email unencrypted and using yahoo mail or a thumb drive. Execs who think that logging on to their work computer and then using yahoo mail somehow hides the fact that they were logged in and the system clearly shows them using their own credentials to move the files. Or, not to point to the source but the flaming guilt emails that came out last year where one very stupid ....person.... sent an email to all of their coworkers showing them how to send restricted data so that no audit or investigation could find it later but didn't think to do the same thing with the email about doing that to other emails. Execs come and go like the seasons due to this level of stupidity/confidence of not getting caught which is exactly why we have all wondered why, seriously why, has this group lasted as long as they have
asalaw
Master Member
Hard to say without seeing the content. But if it is otherwise legally privileged (meaning it's inadmissible as evidence in court), and it accidentally goes out to a third party, that would normally waive the privilege. However, there's a thing called "clawback," where the accidental disclosure doesn't act as a waiver. Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b) provides for clawback if the disclosure was inadvertent and you took reasonable steps to prevent it. It can happen in very large cases involving thousands or even millions of documents. Now and then, something will fall through the cracks.
Cephus
Master Member
Same here. I've seen emails from high corporate-level managers with stuff that absolutely shouldn't be there.
asalaw
Master Member
Years ago I was working on a matter for a company's Latin-American division, and there were two executives carrying on a rather torrid affair over company email. With all the jealousy and melodrama of a telenovela. Some people, regardless of their level in the corporate hierarchy, don't seem to understand that, apart from just basic professionalism, virtually anything in corporate emails is potentially discoverable in litigation.
Cephus
Master Member
They don't know that this stuff gets saved forever somewhere.
Lightning
Master Member
I wonder if there is a legal difference between getting fired for publicly stating a position and getting fired for ignoring a request not to publicly state a position again after having been warned not to.
Letitia Wright and Evangeline Lilly both stepped in it about vaccines during Covid.
Hahaha, this is what I told execs when they would call looking for a way to "delete something forever". "Due to previous issues where techs were terminated due to the deletion of data, the company has a multi level approval process for redaction. First you must get approval from the legal department and then......", "And then it is stored in 2 physical media at 2 physical locations, offsite but also on servers in 3 locations, 2 are ours, and one belongs to Iron Mountain. We do not have a process where all copies are together in one location at one time as that is exactly what our level 5 disaster recovery program plan forbids. It would take over 30 days according to our current data rotation and would include requests to both our backup team and our recovery team so as to not reload it during any form of emergency restores within the next 6 months rotation .... or is that a year? I can't remember. " As long as they truly believed you couldn't do it, you wouldn't find yourself facing an at-will IT level layoff come Monday.
asalaw
Master Member
Not under California law. The statute Carano is suing under makes it expressly illegal to fire someone for political activity. Warnings don't enter into it.
This is why Disney is creating "the chicken dance", THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING, THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO TAKE AWAY OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, OH THE END OF THE WORLD IS HERE!!!!!
They don't actually have those rights but Carano does. But it doesn't even matter because asalaw is pointing out the very topic Disney is trying to get you to forget: California ADDED another layer on top of the 1st amendment to clearly define the action of employment termination being illegal when done due to someone's political beliefs. There is no gray area here, Disney is NOT an employee, they cannot say their "California anti termination rights due to political beliefs are BEING ATTACKED" because they can't fire a corporation. Meaning, and oh so obviously, that only Carano is protected by California's law and not Disney. Thus, Disney distracts us all by claiming 1st amendment which they also don't have as Disney but only as individuals when NOT representing Disney, the entity. And no number of internal reviews and slaps on the wrist are legal, either, because, if you can't be fired over political beliefs, you cannot be corrected or punished over them prior to termination as those items would be considered part and parcel to the purpose of eventual termination and thereby, not legal under California's law.
Last edited:
cboath
Master Member
Maybe we need a post of her comments because at least as i recall, they werent exactly in the vain of gadot and ziegler.they were much worse, but maybe i remeber them wrongly.. I dont recall hearing pedro say anything either, which doesnt mean he did it. Hard to discuss the issue without the comments and hard to use the comments without running afoul of the rules.
RaPtahMeryt99
New Member
It's about time, she's done way too much damage to both franchises of late!
asalaw
Master Member
Simple solution. The offending social media posts are all reproduced in the original complaint, and the Hollywood Reporter article linked here has a frame with the whole complaint. Set aside some time, it's not a fast read.
Lightning
Master Member
that article doesn't make it clear that the final straw Instagram story was actually a repost written by someone else.
this NYPost article, gives a more through breakdown especially of her earlier controversial posts.
See Gina Carano’s tweets and posts that got her fired from ‘The Mandalorian’
Actress Gina Carano has long embraced the force of speaking her mind — an act that got her booted from Star Wars spinoff “The Mandalorian.” The former MMA fighter was confirmed on…
nypost.com
asalaw
Master Member
All that stuff is in the complaint, but admittedly it's a slog. The complaint doesn't mention that the post that got her fired was a repost from Instagram, probably because it's not legally relevant.that article doesn't make it clear that the final straw Instagram story was actually a repost written by someone else.
this NYPost article, gives a more through breakdown especially of her earlier controversial posts.
See Gina Carano’s tweets and posts that got her fired from ‘The Mandalorian’
Actress Gina Carano has long embraced the force of speaking her mind — an act that got her booted from Star Wars spinoff “The Mandalorian.” The former MMA fighter was confirmed on…
Last edited:
