The Tracy Van Almenhorst lawsuit has been a topic of much discussion since it was brought to light in March. Ms. Van Almenhorst is suing her former boss, Johnnie Van Der Slas, for wrongful termination and discrimination. This case goes far beyond the allegations brought against Van Der Slas, as many of the suits have included harassment from other current and former employees. Many people are asking, “just how serious is this lawsuit update?”
Macy’s Lawsuit Update
First, let’s look at some of the facts so that we can understand what this suit is about. There are many different types of cases these days, and every case has different details. Some of them involve physical injury, while others only require verbal or sexual harassment. In general, however, sexual harassment cases are harder to prove than other types, simply because most of the lawsuits related to this type of harassment include detailed descriptions of the offending acts.
Some of the details in the lawsuit have included but are not limited to: pictures and descriptions of inappropriate touching, forcing an employee to engage in sex acts, forcing an employee into a sexual act, and making a minor carry around a doll and pretend to be pregnant.
There are many details to which employees are able to provide details, which is what makes the lawsuit such a remarkable event. It would be difficult to deny that there are many disturbing details here. If you or someone you know has been subjected to these acts, it is important to seek legal help immediately. Tracy Van Almenhorst has been trying to get her lawsuit resolved, but many others who have encountered similar situations are also wondering if this lawsuit is a sign that the old adage, “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”
The details in the lawsuit are nothing compared to the settlement amount, but they do present an interesting correlation between money and lawsuits.
There are many different reasons why this may be so. However, many people are curious as to whether or not a lawsuit advance may actually resolve any legal disputes. To answer this question, let us look at the lawsuit financing in general.
As we have seen previously, the lawsuit financing from an attorney can be quite beneficial to plaintiffs in many different cases. In fact, this is often the only real option for many plaintiffs. However, it must be noted that with any lawsuit financing, it is always important for plaintiffs to be aware of their options. In this regard, it is important to understand the difference between lawsuit funding, and lawsuit financing.
Lawsuit financing is an advance on the anticipated value of a lawsuit. This is money that is provided to plaintiffs in exchange for a percentage of the final judgment.
The money is paid out once the case has been resolved and a settlement has been reached. With respect to the facts presented to the jury in Macy’s case, it appears that there was additional money paid out during the trial, which could have easily been recovered by the defendants. Thus, it is clear that plaintiffs should not simply accept whatever settlement is offered to them by the defendant’s attorneys.
Plaintiffs who lack the means to adequately fund their lawsuits should consider filing a ‘stay away’ order against the company, and seeking a settlement outside of the courts.
This would ensure that no money from the case will be distributed, or any monies received would be returned to the plaintiffs. While this may be a difficult course of action to pursue on your own, it is important to note that there are companies available that specialize in this type of case financing, and it is important that you seek the help of one of these firms if you find yourself in a similar situation.
One of the more interesting details regarding the case, is the discovery of evidence regarding the financial mismanagement at the top levels of the Company. A number of lawsuits have been brought against the company due to this evidence. While there is much to read through in regard to the case, it appears that many of the details regarding the executives’ poor management decision are too scattered and unclear for a simple ruling in court. It is very hard to say whether these suits will hold up in court. Many cases can be lost when the plaintiff’s lawyer does not know what information to use in his defense, and this is the main reason many lawyers choose to just do no win no fee litigation. With so many details concerning the case, there are many interesting bits of information that may never make it to the public eye.