Guest viewing is limited

Titans Talk - Home for all things Tennessee Titans

Status
Not open for further replies.
It always has been a money grab. To my knowledge, none of these happy enders went straight to the police and filed a grievance. I may be wrong about that, but I haven't heard it, Watson being a perv aside.
Didn't at least one of them visit Watson 3 times with this behaviour happening each time? If his behaviour offended you or he harassed you, why not report it after the first time? don't go back 2 more times
 
Supplying an NDA does NOT make them liable or complicit. with the activities tgat occurred.

there has to be a contract between Texans and masseuses. There’s an outside chance buzbee argues “implied contract”. But unlikely to win. The Texans play is to settle to keep the PR down and the story to go away. It’s a money grab.
I disagree for the reasons I stated earlier. Supplying an NDA, massage table and the location where this all occurred certainly opens up Houston to liability litigation. I believe Houston will wind up getting punished as well as Watson, but that's just my opinion.

We're equally entitled to our opinions, and I don't have any problems with you having a different one than my own. I don't have a vested interest in Watson, the Browns or the Texans, so it's not a big deal to me whatever the final outcome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I disagree for the reasons I stated earlier. Supplying an NDA, massage table and the location where this all occurred certainly opens up Houston to liability litigation. I believe Houston will wind up getting punished as well as Watson, but that's just my opinion.

We're equally entitled to our opinions, and I don't have any problems with you having a different one than my own. I don't have a vested interest in Watson, the Browns or the Texans, so it's not a big deal to me whatever the final outcome.

OK and I agree about being vested in any of this. But the point a lot people are missing is that they supplied those items to Watson who was an employee, not the masseuse. I'm certain the Texans can easily prove supplying an NDA is standard procedure for all their employees and have plausible deniability for providing "the table". The burden of proof then becomes on the plaintiff. That's why Buzbee has only filed one case against the Texans. He's hoping to bring their pockets in to get this whole mess to go away. Sound (but greasy) plaintiff's strategy.
 
I know my BHG pretty well, that one doesn’t ring any bells.
Although it is a known fact, lap dances are always better when the stripper is crying.

I thought of Talladega nights, the will Ferrell racing movie.

That's right.... BHGs fancy dinner is Sizzler, not Applebees.

To this day, "I hope you die" is my angry song.
 
That's right.... BHGs fancy dinner is Sizzler, not Applebees.

To this day, "I hope you die" is my angry song.
I can honestly say I still laugh when I hear “you’re pretty when I’m drunk”

I don’t know that many would even get the reference when I drop the line of polishing the 1 eyed gopher, looking at the side of a milk carton, while driving an 18 wheeler.

song for song, one fierce beer coaster is their vast album but Bad Touch is still a great. Every chance at karaoke I get, that’s my go to, no singing required.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not for a workplace issue.

One of Buzbee's allegations is that the Texans failed to prevent Watson’s ongoing misconduct, once the team knew or should have known that he was engaged in questionable behavior. That's basically a claim of negligent supervision. This is a simple negligence causes of action based on an employer's direct negligence rather than on vicarious liability (which Buzbee is also alleging but is much more difficult to prove).

To impose liability on an employer under the theory of negligent supervision, a plaintiff must show that an employer's failure to supervise its employees caused his injuries. The harm imposed on the plaintiff must still have been foreseeable by the Texans, and the harm must have still been employment related (basically were the massages somehow employment related). Like any negligence claim, it has to be shown that the Texans owed these women a legal duty (that includes that the Texans should have foreseen the risk of what Watson allegedly was doing), breached that legal duty, and the plaintiffs suffered damages.

So yes, even if no contract between these women and the Texans, it can still be considered a potential workplace issue and the Texans could be held liable. I'm not saying it is likely they will be held, but the claim could survive a motion for summary judgment.
 
One of Buzbee's allegations is that the Texans failed to prevent Watson’s ongoing misconduct, once the team knew or should have known that he was engaged in questionable behavior. That's basically a claim of negligent supervision. This is a simple negligence causes of action based on an employer's direct negligence rather than on vicarious liability (which Buzbee is also alleging but is much more difficult to prove).

To impose liability on an employer under the theory of negligent supervision, a plaintiff must show that an employer's failure to supervise its employees caused his injuries. The harm imposed on the plaintiff must still have been foreseeable by the Texans, and the harm must have still been employment related (basically were the massages somehow employment related). Like any negligence claim, it has to be shown that the Texans owed these women a legal duty (that includes that the Texans should have foreseen the risk of what Watson allegedly was doing), breached that legal duty, and the plaintiffs suffered damages.

So yes, even if no contract between these women and the Texans, it can still be considered a potential workplace issue and the Texans could be held liable. I'm not saying it is likely they will be held, but the claim could survive a motion for summary judgment.
Your point can be summarized that anybody can sue anybody for anything. That’s what’s happening with Buzbee and the Texans. And I agree with that.

It will either settle(which is Bubee’s play) or be dismissed. It is NOT a workplace issue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So I was thinking… the NFL is in a rock and a hard place. Does the NFL want Houston defending itself in court, which would obviously be pointing a finger at no one but Mr. Happy ending. How would Happy Ending respond to that finger? Possibly with the goods so to speak? What a mess. Could get very ugly for the NFL. The Browns are soooo stupid! Lol
 
So I was thinking… the NFL is in a rock and a hard place. Does the NFL want Houston defending itself in court, which would obviously be pointing a finger at no one but Mr. Happy ending. How would Happy Ending respond to that finger? Possibly with the goods so to speak? What a mess. Could get very ugly for the NFL. The Browns are soooo stupid! Lol
He would respond to that finger by asking it to be inserted in his @$$.
 
Bunch of pansies have to call out bad journalism anonymously. You want credit brought back to your professional field, have the guts to use your name and call him out.

https://nypost.com/2022/07/12/anonymous-espn-employees-rip-adam-schefter-after-mistakes/

loosely associated with this thread and probably worthy of it own. But yeah, I totally agree. Other reporters just envious. and Schefter calls them out “Schefter asked rhetorically if these unnamed colleagues would put their names behind their words, knowing they would not: “Are they going to go on the record?”
 
cb070922dAPC20220708094507.jpg
 
He’s already super rich- I’d just fade away and start massage parlors in strip malls if I were him. Watson’s Massage Parlor “See what happiness is all about”.
 
He's still gonna get suspended, be the "settlements" as they may.
if the NFL has any consistency at all you are correct

NFL could care less about consistency though... why this :bs: is always interesting. What PC crapola the nfl subjugates itself to today vs yesterday when nfl was on its knees pleasuring a different PC Master
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top