- 18 -
Petitioner’s 1996 Litigation Against UTA
On Monday, April 22, 1996, petitioner met with Mr. Ostroff
to discuss his legal claims against UTA. Mr. Ostroff prepared a
draft complaint that alleged the following claims against UTA:
Defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress,
intentional interference with prospective economic advantage,
invasion of privacy, wrongful termination, and breach of contract
(the complaint). Petitioner’s primary concern was to “clear his
name”. He wanted UTA to retract what UTA had said and to
apologize. Petitioner and Mr. Ostroff wanted to resolve
petitioner’s claims against UTA as quickly as possible in order
to mitigate the damages to petitioner’s reputation. Petitioner
was also concerned that UTA had the resources to make litigation
of these claims very expensive, that litigation would tie up his
life and ruin any chance he had of starting a new career, and
that UTA might fabricate more (and worse) stories about him.
That same day, Mr. Ostroff sent a letter to UTA that, among
other things, asserted legal claims against UTA based on UTA’s
alleged unlawful and tortious actions and demanded that (1) UTA
cease and desist from making further defamatory statements
regarding petitioner, (2) UTA allow petitioner access to his
personal files, and (3) UTA pay petitioner all of his earned but
unpaid wages. Mr. Ostroff also proposed a meeting by the
afternoon of Tuesday, April 23, 1996. Petitioner hoped that UTA
would admit that UTA had made a “massive mistake” and apologize.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011