Author Topic: Hulk Hogan sues Vince Russo and WCW for libel!

rwallner

Member

Member # 178



posted 08:39 PM Its being reported by the Associated Press that Terry Bollea (Hulk Hogan) has filed a lawsuit against Vince Russo and WCW for libel and defamation of character. Apparently the incident at Bash at the Beach was real, a shoot, and Hogan feels Russo's comments defamed him and hurt his stature in the business. Hogan's lawyer, John Taylor Jr., has represented the WWF in the past. If this goes to court, it will be really interesting because the question has to be asked, "can you in wrestling say anything about anyone that can be seriously taken as defamatory"? I am now convinced what happened at Bash at the Beach had to have been a shoot. For one thing, if it was an angle it would have been pushed again by now-- there would be no point in doing an angle like that if there wasnt going to be followup for months. Wrestling fans have short memories-- you can lose the heat as fast as you get it. Also, WCW is cutting back, not adding wrestlers or shows. This indicates the whole thing about there being a second wcw on fox is a fiction. So this was real it seems-- question is, does Hogan have a case that he deserves damages from Russo for defamation>? IP: Logged

Hijo del Richard Sullivan

Member

Member # 475



posted 08:46 PM I said the day after it happened that I believed that in the beginning, Hogan, Bischoff, and Russo sat down and came up with this as a "work" but that all three had it in the back of their minds that they would work the other(s). In fact, I believe my exact words were "A-hole 'A' screwed A-hole 'B'." I hope this goes to court, they're all exposed as frauds, and none of them ever grace us with their prescence again. But knowing this business, and the sorry state of the judicial system in this country these days, I know better. [This message has been edited by Hijo del Richard Sullivan (edited 08-17-2000).] IP: Logged

CJ Dick

unregistered





posted 08:47 PM You know, I was going to list the many reasons why this suit is ridiculous. Then I remembered that if you're so fat you have to was with a rag on a stick, you can sue Denny's for its inability to accomodate you. If you spill coffee all over youself, you can sue McDonald's because the coffee was--ready for this?--very hot! And I won't even start about gun manufacturers and "big tobacco". So unless all the nation's lawyers drop dead, I'd say he's lookin' at a couple mil ('course, WCW's check'd probably bounce anyway, at this point). IP: Logged

Hijo del Richard Sullivan

Member

Member # 475



posted 08:51 PM My advice to Henry Holmes and John Taylor would be to watch your backs. If they're part of some bullsh*t lawsuit that's either exposed as A) a stunt to put over a wrestling angle, or B) a wrestling angle "gone bad" (you know, like a "drug deal gone bad"), then they could both have major egg on their faces if they actually pull a judge with one working eye and a brain. IP: Logged

FatSam

Member

Member # 601



posted 08:51 PM I think we should all boycott WCW because it is gay and with crap like this Hogan suite we shouldnt even pay attention to it. Hogan is only doing it for $$$ he even said it himself he would retire but the 5mill a year he makes is enough tto keep him there IP: Logged

Hijo del Richard Sullivan

Member

Member # 475



posted 09:19 PM Funny also that John Taylor was hired by Ric Flair (along with PTL lawyer Bill Diehl) during his suit against Bischoff. To say that it's a shoot because it's illogical would be missing the point, rwallner. This is WCW after all, remember? IP: Logged

Zarr Zanyo

Member

Member # 618



posted 09:29 PM I think what WCW (RUSSO) is doing, is saying, yes wrestling is "sports entertainment" but then turning around and doing things to make the fans think, yes some things are a work, but some things are a shoot, when actually it is a work.

Kinda of like when people use to say, "Wrestling is a fake, except for the championship matches! Just when I think WCW is coming back, they do something stupid.

IP: Logged

Kilroy

Member

Member # 53



posted 09:35 PM Well, part of this that leads me to beleive even more it may be a shoot is that if Hogan's lawyers have any sense, they would know better than to file a fraudulent lawsuit that can be proven is just part of an angle. This could get them into SERIOUS trouble with the courts system. IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 09:47 PM Well, if you ask ME... ...if... *yawn* ...if you assszzzzZZZZZZZZZZ... Barely able to contain my interest *cough* in the Sunshine State! IP: Logged

RebsCager

Member

Member # 445



posted 10:33 PM I really don't care if it's a work or a shoot. That stated, if it's a shoot, I'm agreeing with Russo. But, I am leaning towards shoot. If this were a work and it actually made it into the court of law, all parties could be charged with a felony (lying under oath, etc.). All parties would go to "Club" Fed, but still it's federal prison. Even though John Taylor has worked many times in pro wrestling lawsuits, I would think he'd stay clear of a contrived one. It would very well ruin his reputation as a lawyer. And while it's possible to work them, the story appeared originally in the Atlanta papers. The AJC doesn't print many wrestling stories -- I can remember about ten in the past two years (4 dealing with the Flair suit, 2 dealing with minority party suits, 1 about Rick Rude's death, and about three that were published when Nitro would be local) -- so I don't think they'd easily fall prey to a work. IP: Logged

weaselsuit

Member

Member # 2072



posted 10:34 PM TURN and cough in the Sunshine State... Pretty "Heelish" of me huh?!... IP: Logged

FatSam

Member

Member # 601



posted 10:37 PM To HELL with HOGAN and WCW

and all that HULKIAMANAIA BULL I BOUGHT INTO WHEN I WAS ^ YEARS old i knew it was a lie the nbut i didnt know that the HOG in his name ment he was a big fat money slopping pig like Russo and the rest of WCW's RUMP RIDING bookers IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 10:40 PM ...jeez, Wease, nobody wantsa be a baby no more... ...yo, Rebs, perjury in a state of Georgia civil suit ain't a Federal offense...n' happy 19th... [This message has been edited by Crimson Mask I (edited 08-17-2000).] IP: Logged

rwallner

Member

Member # 178



posted 11:14 PM If Taylor represented a lawsuit over something known to be a fictitious angle, he'd disbarred and ruin his political career. I also have yet to ever see a wrestling angle done so loudly on a big show, and then literally not spoken of for weeks or months. Also if it is an angle, I dont see where it goes? Is Hogan going to come back and wrestle Vince Russo? The fact is this incident didnt create any heat between Hogan and another particular wrestler. So is it possible that at Bash at the Beach, Vince Russo let everything go to his head and decided to gratify his own ego by embarassing Hogan? If this is true, Russo was being highly unprofessional and should be immediately fired. IP: Logged

Hijo del Richard Sullivan

Member

Member # 475



posted 11:20 PM You know yer my heroine, Cager, but the Journal-Constitution is as easily duped as every other news outlet in this country. Wrestling ain't the only thing in this world that's a work and I could sit with my morning paper and a yellow marker and highlight everything I see that's B.S. if I were more cynical. Hell, I ain't convinced Walt Disney ain't runnin' everything on Earth from his secret Moonbase. IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 11:33 PM Hijo, you mean you even question it...? But Moonbase hell, it's his cryogenically-preserved body with the brain hooked up to a supercomputer in his inner sanctum at the epicenter of the famous Catacombs that run under Disney World... Ha! You people DOUBT? I can PROVE Walt Disney's running WCW! Are you gonna tell me you haven't noticed how MICKEY MOUSE it is...?!!? [This message has been edited by Crimson Mask I (edited 08-17-2000).] IP: Logged

Mr. Wonderful

unregistered





posted 12:02 AM Don't ask me. I'm still trying to come to terms with CM and the Rev. in the SAME BED!

IP: Logged

Mr. Wonderful

unregistered





posted 12:03 AM Besides, if he's suing for the Bash thing, wouldn't it be slander, not libel?

IP: Logged

RebsCager

Member

Member # 445



posted 12:37 AM Thanks guys for (somewhat) backing me. And thanks for the birthday greetings, CM, even if it is a little early (my birthday's this Sunday). I know it could be very possible to fool the Atlanta papers. But, I'm ranking it ahead of most of the other newspapers as far as this type of thing goes. That's not worth much in judgment, but I think it's worth a bit of consideration. And, yes, it's slander, not libel. Libel is printed material while slander is spoken. IP: Logged

Big Daddy Meatybone

Member

Member # 708



posted 01:53 AM If this goes to court, it may be a historical case. First, how easy is it too prove that the theatrical and verbal nature of the buisness is, although 99.9% a work, half scripted...and half improvised...on the fly. From there, how can Hogan make a case on something that was said un-scripted, when wrestlers can testify on Russo's behalf that material, sometimes libel and defaming, is improvised. Also, how many wrestlers could testify on Russo's behalf on explaining the seperation between person and character. The whole shoot on Hogan...was on HULK HOGAN...not Terry Bolea. The real name was never used, was it?

Then, if Hogan was to win...were would this leave the best improvisors in the buisness, like NASH and JERICHO. Would this lead to other lawsuits. When Jericho suggested Rock and Foley were gay lovers, because Rock had infatuation of sticking objects up peoples (candy) asses...wasn't that defamation of the Rock's character.

I think Russo is protected...he said what he said in the realm of a television program that has proved to be more choreographed entertainment than a spontaneous sport.

IP: Logged

Eric Walls

Member

Member # 752



posted 02:44 AM

You're right CM.It really is Mickey Mouse at WCW right now. Vince Russo writes such GOOFY television, it's as if his mind is on PLUTO. IP: Logged

J

Member

Member # 214



posted 04:40 AM In reality, Mr. Bollea (Hogan) will have a relatively hard time suing Mr. Russo. First, there is probably a contractual hurdle that allows Mr. Russo and Co. the latitude to recreate the truth. Therefore, it is likely the court will dispose of the suit with a simple motion to dismiss. Even if the suit stands the motion, then it is unlikely that defamation styled complaint will prevail. These suits generally fail unless there is some evidence a reckless or purposeful intention to cause mental distress when it involves a public figure. (From a pragmatic point of view I doubt Hogan would want his image to be that of a mentally fragile individual.) Bottom line Hogan is a public figure under Gertz v. Welch Inc, 418 U.S. 323. This case states that a person is a public figure if they voluntarily inject themselves into issues of importance to some segment of the general public (actors and wrestlers fall into this category). In general, public figures such as Hogan do not have the same protection against defamation that you and I might have. The reason mass media can be sued by an individual, who is not a public figure, is because the average Joe does not have the ability nor the forum to (i.e. a public medium such as the news etc.) for answering the disparaging remarks. However, pubic figures usually have a forum to redress the wrongs. I am relatively sure that Vince McMahan might allow Hogan a few minutes to address the situation. Therefore, Hogan is a public figure and hence he may not avail himself to the protection of defamation laws. Therefore, in light of my futile attempt at analysis, I believe this is a publicity stunt from Hogan (who is a Bill Clinton type of guy when it comes to the spotlight). The type of guy who do not want to leave the spotlight to new guys. (Sorry about the shameless political reference). It is a shame that Hogan will even stoop to taking WCW to court to keep himself in the public light.



Just Thoughts

J

IP: Logged

Medical Lamp

Member

Member # 342



posted 09:29 AM Hoagie will appear this evening at 6 p.m./ET on the CourtTV show "Pros & Cons" to discuss his lawsuit with WCW. Also appearing: Randy "Macho Man" Savage (?!?).



Pros & Cons is Court TV's daily legal newsmagazine. The Hulkster reminds me of Rainbow's song "The Spotlight Kid:" he'll never get enough of the bright lights, regardless of the arena.

IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 09:30 AM ...ZZZ...wha? ...hey, Mr. W, get your mind outta the gutter...you think these freakin' indy promoters are gonna spring for more than ONE room...? ...mmph...hey J, isn't 'Hulk Hogan' a fictional character in the first place...? ...whatever... ...goddang it Rev, you're dreamin' you're Dusty Rhodes again, willya stop tho'win' da Baahnic Ebbow, wake up and go to sleep... ... ...zzz... IP: Logged

Hijo del Richard Sullivan

Member

Member # 475



posted 11:06 AM Remember when Brad Siegel took over and everyone lined up to put him over as a visionary who really knew his stuff (I always love the buttkissing of the new boss). Well, let's look at how aware Mr. Siegel is. He's got a "Creative Director" who's idea of being creative is ripping off cooler movies than his predecessors and who spends more time trying to "swerve" his own employees and a tiny fraction of the actual (already dwindling) audience that he does actually writing the shows. He's got a "top draw," Kevin Nash, who's entire agenda is built around killing everyone else's momentum and bringing his best friend back into a lifestyle that will probably wreck his family life and kill him before he's old. Oh, and he's got about eighty million dollars of debt. What kind of bonehead is Siegel? This is the entertainment industry. At a time in which they're that far in the hole, should he really have a head writer who's idea of presenting entertaining television is jacking off for a national TV audience? Should he have a "top star" who's never drawn flies (and trust me the real star of the NWO angle was Vince McMahon) going on TV with a cardboard cut-out of Scott Hall when Siegel supposedly doesn't want him back in the company? If the Hogan thing realy does go to court, my guess is that WCW is gonna claim it was "all part of the script" (even though they're gonna have a hard time producing an actual copy of that "script" since they probably shredded all the evidence to prove it was a "shoot"). If Hall isn't given his job back, then Hogan's lawyers can point to the fact that Nash is running his own programs right under the nose of his boss (who has no intention of letting an alcoholic drug addict with prior history of physically threatening his bosses back in to disrupt the company). Siegel either has to cut loose both Hall and Nash immediately or he's gonna be raked over the coals and made to look incredibly stupid to his corporate cronies. [This message has been edited by Hijo del Richard Sullivan (edited 08-18-2000).] IP: Logged

Larry

Member

Member # 8



posted 12:42 PM Doesn't one have to HAVE character before one can sue for defamation of said character?

IP: Logged

J

Member

Member # 214



posted 09:06 AM Hey Mask, LMAO, I never thought about Hulk Hogan being a fictional character. Maybe if Hulk is successful I could open a firm who represents Mickey Mouse and the other Disney Characters. Maybe I could unionize The Cartoon Network. Have a great weekend.

J

IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 11:37 AM ...mmmph...whazza... ...Oh, J, y'know, I think Big Daddy M kinda said it first, maybe I dreamed it, I dunno... ...dammit, Rev, you're dreamin' about Lou Thesz again, stop grindin' yer teeth, wake up and go to sleep awreddy... ...zz... IP: Logged

J

Member

Member # 214



posted 04:26 AM Mask, Err so whats your point??? J IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 10:56 AM ...rrgghhh...trine a get some sleep here... ...just credit where credit is due, J, Big DMB said it first before I did... ...now willya stop wakin' me up, s'bad enuff with the Rev here mumblin' in his sleep 'bout whatever the fug Brian Knobbs told him... ...now how'm I gonna get back to sleep, everybody babbling about WCDub...dd... ...z...zz... ... IP: Logged

J

Member

Member # 214



posted 12:59 PM Gotcha...enjoy the nap J IP: Logged

RCPinFL

Member

Member # 699



posted 01:10 PM First, this confirms my belief that the incident at the "Bash" was a shoot. If Hogan's attorney were stupid enough to knowingly file a frivilious lawsuit and be called on it, he could lose his license to practice law as well as be heavily fined. All involved (Hogan included) could also be cited for contempt of court, with possible jail time. For the record, the lawsuit was filed in Fulton County Court in Georgia, which is where WCW is headquartered...not in any Federal court. My guess is that Hogan does have a chance at winning at a trial. Whatever you may think of him as a person or performer, the main question that will be decided is this: Was what happened at the "Bash" done with the deliberate intent to damage Hogan/Bollea's personal or professional reputation or standing. When Hogan/Bollea's contract is presented in evidence, and evidence is brought forth describing the discussions which had supposedly taken place throughout the day prior to the event regarding what was to take place in the ring, and Russo's anger/fustration at Hogan/Bollea's decision to use his creative control clause to his advantage...the answer will most likely be "YES". If I were Brad Seigel, I would be working hard to reach some type of settlement now before this came close to trial. I'm sure the AOL folks certainly would like that as well before they take over. IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 01:42 PM Okay, I'm awake. Alright...maybe I'm going Oliver Stone again here, but I still think it's a freakin' stunt. First, say Hogan and Russo approach these lawyers, say 'Look, here's a couple hundred K, file some papers and take a coupla depositions, we'll see how much publicity we can all get out of this and then we'll "settle"...', whadda they gonna say? 'No?' HA! Before anybody's risking disbarment or anything worse for a frivolous suit, this'd have to actually go to trial. I don't THINK so. (And correct me if I'm wrong, counselors, but isn't there a degree of immunity in civil cases with respect to perjury? If there's not an actual CRIME involved? Isn't it basically expected that at LEAST one side is lying?) IP: Logged

rwallner

Member

Member # 178



posted 01:57 PM cm, the wcw is cutting back on costs, they arent about to waste all that money so Hogan can pay off lawyers so sue them in a bogus case. Plus which it would indicate a storyline more elaborate than those guys are capable of thinking. Too much time has passed since Bash at the Beach, and nothing has happened. They havent even mentioned it on tv. Only the hardcores like us are even going to remember it at all pretty soon. There's simply no indication at all its a work at at this point. Where would this angle be going? There isnt any second show on Fox coming up. Hogan hasnt been on tv and has no heat with any wrestlers. What, they are going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to build up a hogan vs. vince russo ppv? IP: Logged

Kilroy

Member

Member # 53



posted 02:35 PM Amen Rwallner, this is SO looking like a shoot now, I mean, there is no angle with this, if it is, it is going to be a waste if they don't do something with it quick. Also, I was thinking the same thing, they are cutting back so much in WCW, why in the HELL would they waste money on a frivilous lawsuit? I think it was being kicked around backstage, Russo came out and Pearl Harbored Hogan in a legit shoot, and now he is working angles off the orignial shoot with fake ones. IP: Logged

Crimson Mask I

unregistered





posted 04:51 PM You guys may very well be right, I'm like I said maybe in paranoid mode when it comes to WCW 'shoots'...if this IS one, it's the first. (And as far as the money they're expending goes, they couldn't BUY this much media space, but...) ...IF this is for real...a couple observations: 1. My sympathies would be with Hogan, believe it or not. 2. If I understand civil law, though, the truth of the accusation is an absolute defense against an action for slander/libel/defamation. If Hogan WAS playing his 'creative control' card going into the PPV, which isn't hard to believe, he may not have a leg to stand on here. [This message has been edited by Crimson Mask I (edited 08-20-2000).] IP: Logged

JKeane

Member

Member # 644



posted 07:33 PM Those yellow "Hulkster" shirts are at the "dumping" price of $5.00 a pop over at the WCW site, as well as most things Page and Goldberg. I wonder if we aren't supposed to notice what might be happening? IP: Logged