di Paula Dean revelations continue...mercy

[lonewolf]

The money was not great. Mrs. Charles spent years making less than $10 an hour, even after Ms. Deen became a Food Network star

Well, it's obvious somebody is lying. But which person?

Deen reacted to the claims Friday in an exclusive statement to ET: "Ms. Charles' 'issue' is about money, not race. She receives a salary of more than $70,000 per year, plus profit sharing and benefits. For 20 years she has been paid a fair wage for her work, but she feels she deserves even more money. She claimed to be a friend of Paula Deen s but is now trying to cash in on the current situation

."

[tuffstuff]

Well, it's obvious somebody is lying. But which person?

."

The Times shoulda solve that by looking at a paystub/tax rtn. But if she making 70K a year she naw spend it pan housing. Pity fi she tho cuz since she wait till public burnout on the story, nobody nuh want hear bout her woes now

[lonewolf]

The Times shoulda solve that by looking at a paystub/tax rtn. But if she making 70K a year she naw spend it pan housing. Pity fi she tho cuz since she wait till public burnout on the story, nobody nuh want hear bout her woes now

Yep, I agree.

[Tuff Gong]

Race-based claims thrown out in discrimination lawsuit against Paula Deen

Published August 12, 2013FoxNews.com

• 
  In this Tuesday, Jan. 17, 2012 photo, celebrity chef Paula Deen poses for a portrait in New York. Deen recently announced that she has Type 2 diabetes. (AP Photo/Carlo Allegri) (AP2012)
  

Celebrity chef Paula Deen scored a legal victory Monday when a federal judge threw out race discrimination claims against her by a former Savannah restaurant manager, whose lawsuit has already cost the celebrity cook a valuable chunk of her culinary empire.
Lisa Jackson sued Deen and her brother, Bubba Hiers, last year saying she suffered from sexual harassment and racially offensive talk and employment practices that were unfair to black workers during her five years as a manager of Uncle Bubba's Seafood and Oyster House. Deen is co-owner of the restaurant, which is primarily run by her brother.
However, the claims of race discrimination by Jackson, who is white, were gutted in the 20-page opinion by U.S. District Court Judge William T. Moore Jr. The judge agreed with lawyers for Deen and Hiers that Jackson has no standing to sue her former employers for what she claims was poor treatment of black workers, regardless of her claims that she was offended and placed under additional stress.
Jackson, at best, "is an accidental victim of the alleged racial discrimination," Moore said in his ruling. "There are no allegations that defendant Hiers's racially offensive comments were either directed toward plaintiff or made with the intent to harass her."
The ruling lets stand Jackson's claims that Hiers sexually harassed her when she worked at the restaurant from 2005 to 2010. However, the judge said he was reserving the chance to rule on requests from Deen's lawyers to dismiss other claims in the lawsuit.
The judge added that to allow Jackson to seek legal recourse for discrimination directed toward other workers "would serve to conscript federal courts as human resource departments that are responsible for imposing and monitoring a federally created standard for harmony in the workplace."
Deen's publicist said Monday Deen is pleased with the judge’s decision.
"As Ms. Deen has stated before, she is confident that those who truly know how she lives her life know that she believes in equal opportunity, kindness and fairness for everyone,” Elana Weiss said in a statement emailed to FoxNews.com.
Jackson's race-based claims have already resulted in serious damage to Deen's public image. It was Jackson's lawyer who questioned Deen under oath in May when she acknowledged having used racial slurs in the past. A transcript of the legal deposition became public in June, and the backlash against Deen caused the Food Network and other corporate sponsors and business partners to drop her.
The judge's decision comes a month after Deen and Hiers dumped their attorneys and hired a new legal team. But the court motions seeking dismissal for all race-based claims in the case were filed in December, months before those changes were made.
In her lawsuit, Jackson had claimed Hiers frequently made jokes containing racial slurs at work and prohibited black workers from using the restaurant's front entrance and customer restrooms. She said she was personally offended because she had biracial nieces.
Attorneys for Deen have said in court filings that Jackson's lawsuit was based on "scurrilous and false claims." They said before Jackson filed suit, she threatened to embarrass Deen publicly unless she paid the ex-employee "huge sums of money."
The Associated Press contributed to this report




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment...#ixzz2boHk9Vnk

[lonewolf]

07-02-2013, 12:59 PM #64
lonewolf

• View Profile
• View Forum Posts
• Visit Homepage

Senior Member

---

Join Date Aug 2005
Location onthemove
Posts 3,092

Tuff gong=QUOTE:How many lives she and cracked head Bubba has destroyed with their toxic workplace environment if all or the rest of the allegations against the pair proves out in court?

The key word is proved out in court and that has not happened...Just a whee bit dramatic are you not? Someone's life destroyed over a work place environment? It's a job for christ sake, not the end of the world. We all have been through jobs that we have not liked for reasons that were toxic and that's why we leave them. This is about a disgruntled employee finding a miscreant tort lawyer and going after the big bucks.

Just as I said all along....and it has not proved out in court.

[Tuff Gong]

Just as I said all along....and it has not proved out in court.

Just as I said before you can quote and now adlib, but you can't read.
First off, I said if the allegations against her and crack-ead Bubba is proven.
Secondly, the Court is not over.
Thirdly, she admitted to using racial slurs.
The Judge did not find that she did not use racial slurs.
The Judge agreed with her that the Plaintiff had no standing in the matter.
The case continues with the sexual harassment allegations.

[lonewolf]

Not only read, but I can spell and smell...and right now somethings stinks. Smells like a stinky old goat.
You from Jamaica, so you know what a goat smell like....I smell a stinky old scape goat.

[Tuff Gong]

Not only read, but I can spell and smell...and right now somethings stinks. Smells like a stinky old goat.
You from Jamaica, so you know what a goat smell like....I smell a stinky old scape goat.

I see ....... How does this ad hominem rant, fix the fact that you cannot read worth a lick or is just too dishonest to relate to the factual reports?

[lonewolf]

I see ....... How does this ad hominem rant, fix the fact that you cannot read worth a lick or is just too dishonest to relate to the factual reports?

And how does your ad hominem attack of ''I can't read" and that "I'm dishonest", fix the fact that WE SEE THINGS FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.

With the Dean case you can't discern an overall pattern from a mass of detail. In other words, you don't or won't see the big picture. I see it as "It's about money". "It's about extortion." You see it different.
So it goes...

I read a piece from a lawyer that said if Dean would have paid out 1 million dollars to keep the extortionist quiet, she would have saved her 20 million dollar empire. Dean refused and paid the price.

[Tuff Gong]

And how does your ad hominem attack of ''I can't read" and that "I'm dishonest", fix the fact that WE SEE THINGS FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE.

Clearly you don't even overstand the meaning of ad hominem.
From your reply to the new article on Paula I get the impression you could not read or could but was being dishonest. Which is it and how is this an ad hominem attack to ask a question/draw a conclusion, based on your reply?

Your ad hominem rant however had zero to do with the topic of this the thread: di Paula Dean revelations continue...mercy.
It follows on the pattern you have adopted since page one of this discussion.

[lonewolf]

Clearly you don't even overstand the meaning of ad hominem.
From your reply to the new article on Paula I get the impression you could not read or could but was being dishonest. Which is it and how is this an ad hominem attack to ask a question/draw a conclusion, based on your reply?

Your ad hominem rant however had zero to do with the topic of this the thread: di Paula Dean revelations continue...mercy.
It follows on the pattern you have adopted since page one of this discussion.

Ad hominem | Define Ad hominem at Dictionary.comdictionary.reference.com/browse/ad+hominem - Cached - Similar
Ad hominem definition, appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special
interests ... attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument

Yawn...this is what you said...

the fact that you cannot read worth a lick or is just too dishonest

It's an attack. It's obvious that I can read because I'm answering your post. Saying I'm dishonest is also an attack on my character. You can spin this anyway you like, but you are attacking me and not my arguement.

Let me break it down for you...

Insult 1) the fact that you cannot read worth a lick = attack

Insult 2) or is just too dishonest = attack

Neither attacks the arguement, but clearly attacks the person.

Get it? But of course you won't and will pretend that you don't.

That's ok, bang on with you game!

[Tuff Gong]

It's an attack. It's obvious that I can read because I'm answering your post. !

No, it obvious your are dishonest or can read but cannot comprehend because you read from the post yet fail to overstand what it is about. Then you depart from the topic and make attacks on my person that is in no way shape or form relating to the topic of this thread: di Paula Dean revelations continue...mercy.
That is the definition of an Ad Hominem attack.
You have been doing since the start of this thread.

I will remind you again, the topic is of this thread is: di Paula Dean revelations continue...mercy

[lonewolf]

A text book case of an excercise in futility.

[Tuff Gong]

A text book case of an excercise in futility.

This is topic of the thread: di Paula Dean revelations continue...mercy

[Tuff Gong]

Lawyers agree to drop Paula Deen discrimination lawsuit

Published August 23, 2013Associated Press

• 
  In this Jan. 17, 2012 file photo, celebrity chef Paula Deen poses for a portrait in New York. (AP)
  

SAVANNAH, Ga. – Lawyers signed a deal Friday to drop a discrimination and sexual harassment lawsuit against celebrity cook Paula Deen, who was dumped by the Food Network and other business partners after she said under oath that she had used racial slurs in the past.
A document filed in U.S. District Court in Savannah said both sides agreed to drop the lawsuit "without any award of costs or fees to any party." No other details of the agreement were released. The judge in the case had not signed an order to finalize the dismissal.
Former employee Lisa Jackson last year sued Deen and her brother, Bubba Hiers, saying she suffered from sexual harassment and racially offensive talk and employment practices that were unfair to black workers during her five years as a manager of Uncle Bubba's Seafood and Oyster House. Deen is co-owner of the restaurant, which is primarily run by her brother.
The dismissal deal came less than two weeks after Judge William T. Moore throw out the race discrimination claims, ruling Jackson, who is white, had no standing to sue over what she said was poor treatment of black workers. He let Jackson's claims of sexual harassment stand, but the deal drops that also.
The lawsuit would be dismissed "with prejudice," which means it can't be brought again with the same claims.
"While this has been a difficult time for both my family and myself, I am pleased that the judge dismissed the race claims and I am looking forward to getting this behind me, now that the remaining claims have been resolved," Deen said in a statement Friday.
Jackson also issued a statement that backpedaled on assertions in her lawsuit that Deen held "racist views."
"I assumed that all of my complaints about the workplace environment were getting to Paula Deen, but I learned during this matter that this was not the case," Jackson said in the statement, which was confirmed by her attorney. "The Paula Deen I have known for more than eight years is a woman of compassion and kindness and will never tolerate discrimination or racism of any kind toward anyone."
It wasn't Jackson's racism allegations, but rather Deen's own words that ended up causing serious damage to her public image and pocketbook. The lawsuit got little public attention for more than a year until Jackson's lawyer questioned Deen under oath in May. A transcript of the deposition became public in June, and it caused an immediate backlash against Deen.
Deen was asked if she has ever used the N-word. "Yes, of course," Deen replied, though she added: "It's been a very long time."
Within a few days, the Food Network didn't renew Deen's contract and yanked her shows off the air. Smithfield Foods, the pork producer that paid Deen as a celebrity endorser, dropped her soon after.
Retailers including Wal-Mart and Target said they'll no longer sell Deen's products and publisher Ballantine scuttled plans for her upcoming cookbook even though it was the No. 1 seller on Amazon. Deen also parted company with her longtime New York agent, Barry Weiner, who had worked to turn Deen into a comfort-food queen since she was little more than a Savannah restaurant owner and self-publisher of cookbooks.
The judge issued an order Friday saying he still plans a hearing on whether Jackson's lead attorney, Matthew Billips, should be sanctioned for what Deen's lawyers called unprofessional conduct in the case. In earlier court filings Deen's lawyers said Billips threatened Deen with embarrassing media exposure, made inappropriate comments about the cook and the lawsuit on Twitter and purposefully asked Deen embarrassing questions that weren't relevant to the case during her deposition.
However, a filing by Deen's attorneys asked the judge to drop their motion for sanctions against Billips.
Billips declined to comment on the lawsuit resolution other than to say "the matter has been amicably resolved." Deen attorneys Grace Speights and Harvey Weitz did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
Forbes magazine last year ranked Deen as the fourth-highest-earning celebrity cook last year, figuring she had hauled in $17 million. Her company Paula Deen Enterprises generates total annual revenue of nearly $100 million, according to Burt Flickinger III, president of retail consultancy Strategic Resource Group.
In her statement Friday, Deen said that "those who truly know how I live my life know that I believe in kindness and fairness for everyone." She also promised to take a closer look at how her employees are treated.
"I look forward to getting back to doing what I love," she said.
In her lawsuit, Jackson had claimed Hiers frequently made jokes containing racial slurs at work and prohibited black workers from using the restaurant's front entrance and customer restrooms. She said she was personally offended because she had biracial nieces.
Attorneys for Deen said in court filings that Jackson's lawsuit was based on "scurrilous and false claims."
They said before Jackson filed suit, she threatened to embarrass Deen publicly unless she paid the ex-employee "huge sums of money."




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment...#ixzz2cqGSmnEL