MOVING TO FRONT FROM NOVEMBER 3--UPDATED
I do not know any details about the settlement, except I have been told the Kipnis book will remain unchanged. When we last heard about the case, it had survived a motion to dismiss on terms that seemed favorable to the plaintiff. This outcome suggests discovery may have been less favorable to the plaintiff, but that is just a surmise based on limited evidence. (Perhaps there was a substantial payout to the plaintiff for attorney fees or damages?) If anyone has additional details, please e-mail me, preferably with a source (even if not a source that can be cited in public).
UPDATE: I am told reliably that discovery was going well for the plaintiff, and that the settlement was unrelated to adverse developments during discovery. Understand that 99% or more of cases settle, since trial is an ordeal for plaintiffs as well as defendants. So it's quite plausible that other factors motivated settlement.
ANOTHER: Laura Kipnis writes: "In case there’s any confusion, Unwanted Advances remains in print and I stand by everything in the book."
Recent Comments