Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- I want to.
Very wealthy guy runs SAC capital.
He was sued I think I'm defended himself yet to spend a lot of money to defend himself He won them but it cost him an all electric cost there is tens of millions of dollars what was sinful He was sued for allegedly.
So as to disparage.
Of the company whose stocks He was -- Of court found after five years of litigation.
That there was no evidence that mr.
-- or SAC capital did this.
And -- throughout the case against itself can you guess what the legal bills were in.
Five years for the major law firms that did such a wonderful job and defending and would you see judge here's what you need -- English rule do you know the ten delusional apparently attempting the new you're -- attempting you know on this one we are steadfastly against the English rule in this country.
But in commercial cases like this.
Even the winner loses he's a very wealthy man but for anybody to pay tens of millions.
A little -- I think I don't for about litigation Arctic.
So as much as it is litigation.
-- Cohen is at the centerpiece of the SEC.
Investigation into insider trading and hedge funds He can't afford any losses He needs massive overkill to protect his multi billion dollar -- This is the second time in a year that He has successfully fended off litigation.
But the courts have either verbally or implicitly characterized.
As strong do anything look at Asian -- -- working off of the multi -- he's -- That it just as it's gonna be so He should not have to absolve the legal cost of defending himself against him a suit which went down to defeat.
There is important to suit and should -- -- there is there is a provision in New Jersey hello this case was in New Jersey the other one was in federal -- -- -- -- and can come on judges -- -- English rule which would -- which would allow a federal judge to determine it was so frivolous that the -- -- -- -- -- -- judges have -- the only reason you don't -- -- mutual -- -- because He would take a great deal of money out of lawyers' pockets wouldn't know the only reason I don't want the English -- is is because it would deter people from challenging.
The government when it's the only needs to be challenged Johnson's absolute nonsense that I -- -- -- theory behind their -- no -- -- In America unlike in England -- we've seen great progress through the course brown vs board of education.
But congress and the state legislatures were unable to desegregate the schools.
Only judges could do some of that with the English -- no one would have file that case because they would have had feared they wouldn't have feared having to pay a legal be a they -- how do you know sometimes change the law on this country.
By courageous lawyers willing to challenge the status quo.
In a courtroom yet again.
Wrong OK and -- for much everybody a better job currently sitting here except.
Yes you do about it -- yeah you wanna profile oddly Victoria critics -- at the end.
I gotta do not get me that tomahawk business that way you can have more of this delights such a pleasure.
Filter by section