HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Larry Brooks: Sean Avery prevails in libel suit against Howard Berger (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=682767)

RangerBoy 09-20-2009 01:29 AM

Sean Avery prevails in libel suit against Howard Berger
 
Quote:

The Rangers' Sean Avery won a settlement in his libel case against Toronto radio reporter Howard Berger following mediation earlier this month, Slap Shots has learned. The suit was brought in the aftermath of the pregame incident in Toronto on Nov. 10, 2007, after which Berger alleged that Avery had made comments to Jason Blake relating to the Leaf winger's previously diagnosed cancer. Terms of the settlement are confidential. Avery has at least one more pending suit relating to the incident.
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...G3jm4hlsp0EbOM

So much has happened since then. Brooks did report Sean was going to sue but you did not hear much about the case.

Berger said a Ranger player told him about Avery's alleged comments about Blake. Avery had an incident with Darcy Tucker in pre-game warmups.

Chimp 09-20-2009 03:32 AM

Good for Avery. Berger certainly deserves it, I remember that crap he wrote in the paper, which was based on nothing.

I throw it up on the Toronto board as well and give you credit for it RangerBoy.

hlundqvist30* 09-20-2009 04:14 AM

God the 2 weeks following that incident were an epic mess on HF, and literally hundreds of posters looked like absolute idiots after bashing Avery for something that a reporter made up.

Although, once the news came out that it was a ******** article, that didn't stop people from referencing the imaginary incident.

Blueblood 2 09-20-2009 06:21 AM

I hope the settlement was not from a finding of diminished value or earning capability. He is being paid handsomely by Dallas!

DutchShamrock 09-20-2009 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hlundqvist30 (Post 21183212)
God the 2 weeks following that incident were an epic mess on HF, and literally hundreds of posters looked like absolute idiots after bashing Avery for something that a reporter made up.

Although, once the news came out that it was a ******** article, that didn't stop people from referencing the imaginary incident.

and this won't stop people either. It did it's damage and it won't be undone.

SkerZ 09-20-2009 09:02 AM

I love how many people hate Avery....The guy is awesome he gets his job done and he makes the games that much more exciting to watch good for him and his court case win

we want cup 09-20-2009 10:14 AM

I don't see why Avery wouldn't sue. The damage done to his reputation is huge. Without that incident, "sloppy seconds" probably isn't as big of a deal, either.

SomebodySaveKreider 09-20-2009 10:22 AM

Good for Sean.

So often we see people say "oh those allegations of me doing/saying that are false!!!" Then they just let it die.

Sean made sure to hit this jerk where it hurts the most.

LeafsGuru93 09-20-2009 11:03 AM

I dislike Avery more then anyone but what Berger did, I hope he gets fired for that. Lying like that, that Avery said something about Blake's (or anyone's) cancer is the lowest thing anyone can do in journalism.

FYI Ranger fans, Leafs fans never liked Berger.

Good job on Sean for exposing Berger for the lair he is. well Leafs fans already knew that but now everyone knows that.

OverTheCap 09-20-2009 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RangerBoy (Post 21182679)
Berger said a Ranger player told him about Avery's alleged comments about Blake. Avery had an incident with Darcy Tucker in pre-game warmups.

I wonder if Berger is making that up, trying to place blame on someone else, or if one of the Rangers really did tell Berger about those supposed comments.

Pretty messed up of that Ranger player if true. I know some teammates don't like Avery but that's not right. Wonder who it was...

Declan 09-20-2009 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hlundqvist30 (Post 21183212)
God the 2 weeks following that incident were an epic mess on HF, and literally hundreds of posters looked like absolute idiots after bashing Avery for something that a reporter made up.

Although, once the news came out that it was a ******** article, that didn't stop people from referencing the imaginary incident.

Rumor has it that Avery printed out that thread & used this as evidence that his reputation had been tarnished by the comments that Berger made :laugh:

Chief 09-20-2009 06:51 PM

The headline for this thread and Brooks himself are misleading.

Sean Avery didn't "win" anything in a courtroom. The other side simply decided it made more sense to settle than to continue to fight this battle. Those decisions are often based on the high costs to defend a lawsuit. In fact, people often settle even when they're "right" because the lawsuit gets too costly for them. In this case, you'd think a reporter and his newspaper would want to protect his integrity - even at a high financial cost - but these are hard financial times so who knows.

And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.

nyr2k2 09-20-2009 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief (Post 21191163)
The headline for this thread and Brooks himself are misleading.

Sean Avery didn't "win" anything in a courtroom. The other side simply decided it made more sense to settle than to continue to fight this battle. Those decisions are often based on the high costs to defend a lawsuit. In fact, people often settle even when they're "right" because the lawsuit gets too costly for them. In this case, you'd think a reporter and his newspaper would want to protect his integrity - even at a high financial cost - but these are hard financial times so who knows.

And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.

The title says nothing about winning in a courtroom.

NY Ranger86 09-20-2009 07:19 PM

Quote:

And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.
please.

The Thomas J.* 09-20-2009 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief (Post 21191163)
The headline for this thread and Brooks himself are misleading.


And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.

What? First I ever heard about this.

Berger abused his position as a reporter he should be Fired never to work reporting the news AGAIN!

clmetsfan 09-20-2009 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief (Post 21191163)
And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.

I'm dying to see you provide a source for that. That seems like something you read on the Leafs board with no basis in reality whatsoever.

FromTheSide 09-20-2009 11:37 PM

Intresting...drury , the guy who smiles whenever him and avery are seen together ( and you dont see drury do much of that to begin with)

Yeah i'm going to belive that :laugh:

Brooklyn Ranger 09-20-2009 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief (Post 21191163)
The headline for this thread and Brooks himself are misleading.

Sean Avery didn't "win" anything in a courtroom. The other side simply decided it made more sense to settle than to continue to fight this battle. Those decisions are often based on the high costs to defend a lawsuit. In fact, people often settle even when they're "right" because the lawsuit gets too costly for them. In this case, you'd think a reporter and his newspaper would want to protect his integrity - even at a high financial cost - but these are hard financial times so who knows.

And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.

"For what it's worth," you have now done to Drury what was done to Avery. Lucky you're not a journalist.

bcrt2000 09-21-2009 12:47 AM

The fan590 stood behind Berger so they likely are paying the settlement.

danno2530 09-21-2009 01:12 AM

Good for Avery. Berger deserves it after putting that out in the media. Then again, what do you expect with someone affiliated with Eklund.

MasterofGrond 09-21-2009 02:03 AM

I dislike Avery and all, but good for him. Seriously, libel is bad news. Tarnishing a man's reputation unfairly, for any reason, is reprehensible.

bobbop 09-21-2009 02:22 AM

Some insurance company somewhere is paying the settlement.

Since most of you here are fairly young here's some advice to you -- when you start accumulating any wealth, own a house etc. you need to get a personal liability policy to protect your assets. It sits over your homeowners and auto liability policies. In this litigous society we live in, normal people get sued every day. (Not that Howard Berger is normal) You need to be protected.

Ola 09-21-2009 03:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief (Post 21191163)
And for what it's worth, Drury was supposedly Berger's source.

No, thats not correct.

1. Someone on the Rangers were supposedly Bergers source.

2. Someone respected on the Rangers were supposedly disturbed by Avery's antics.

These two things also wasn't even repoted at the same time. There is no connection between the two at all.

I don't think much at all points to wards the fact that it was Drury. Drury could very well have said to a repoter "he is gooing over the line at times" off the record. But couldn't it just as well have been Redden? Or any of the other vets?

Then on the Bergers source. We don't know if he had a source or not. He did not report a source the first time. It could just as well have been himself trying to put 1+1 together. And if he had a source, it could have been anyone.

Also, didn't Jason Blake himself after a while confirm that Avery didn't comment on his cancer?

FromTheSide 09-21-2009 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ola (Post 21197099)
No, thats not correct.

1. Someone on the Rangers were supposedly Bergers source.

2. Someone respected on the Rangers were supposedly disturbed by Avery's antics.

These two things also wasn't even repoted at the same time. There is no connection between the two at all.

I don't think much at all points to wards the fact that it was Drury. Drury could very well have said to a repoter "he is gooing over the line at times" off the record. But couldn't it just as well have been Redden? Or any of the other vets?

Then on the Bergers source. We don't know if he had a source or not. He did not report a source the first time. It could just as well have been himself trying to put 1+1 together. And if he had a source, it could have been anyone.

Also, didn't Jason Blake himself after a while confirm that Avery didn't comment on his cancer?

The dbag lies about avery mocking cancer but he can't lie about teamates stabbing avery in the back? c'mon now.(not that im point this to you its just to show some people they need their eyes checked if they belive that drury line for even a second)

JLHockeyKnight 09-21-2009 05:30 AM

While we're at it can we get Avery to take out Eklund too?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:29 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.