Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

abatt

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    5,406
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About abatt

  • Rank
    Diamonds Circle

Registration Profile Information

  • Connection to/interest in ballet** (Please describe. Examples: fan, teacher, dancer, writer, avid balletgoer)
    fan
  • City**
    New York
  • State (US only)**, Country (Outside US only)**
    New York

Recent Profile Visitors

4,567 profile views
  1. Thanks for posting. Loved watching this 1990 performance.
  2. GOODMAN THEATRE IN COLLABORATION WITH SHOWTIME AND THE ACTORS FUND TO STREAM THE 1999 TONY AWARD®-WINNING BROADWAY PRODUCTION OF DEATH OF A SALESMAN STARRING TONY AWARD WINNER BRIAN DENNEHY AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING BEGINNING ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 21 AT 8 PM ET ONLY AT PLAYBILL.COM In an unprecedented collaboration with Showtime and The Actors Fund, Goodman Theatre is proud to present the stream of the Tony Award Winning Broadway production of Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, starring two-time Tony Award winner Brian Dennehy and directed by Goodman Theatre Artisti
  3. The New York Philharmonic has cancelled all performances through June 2021.
  4. Larry Nasser was abusing women during the course of and in the scope of his employment as a doctor employed by US Gymnastics. He was the agent of that organization, and his job on behalf of US Gymnastics was to provide medical care to the women on the team. US Gymnastics gave him authority to act on its behalf, and gave him the imprimatur of authority with respect to the ladies on the team. That's why his misconduct resulted in the resignation of so many other people who were supervisors and administrators for US Gymnastics. They were negligent in giving Nasser power over team members.
  5. Just to clarify the decision, these were summary judgment motions. As explained at pp. 5-6 of the Court's decison, in that type of motion the court assumes that the allegations contained in the plaintiff's complaint are true. As stated in the opinion, "the plaintiff is accorded the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and the court determines only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory.” I don't think there was much, or any, discovery, in this case. The Court did accept all of Waterbury's allegations as ttue, but even so determined that she had no cogn
  6. In the legal profession, when a preposterous claim is asserted, the lawyer phrase is that the claim does not pass the giggle test. In other words, sometimes a claim is so lacking in legal or logical support that it cannot seriously be asserted with a straight face. The claims asserted by Waterbury and her attorney against NYCB and SAB flunked the giggle test. They were NEVER going to succeed. Any halfway decent lawyer knew that from the outset. The claims against NYCB and SAB were asserted simply for purposes of blackmailing a deep pocketed institution.
  7. Another thing that I strongly objected to in her video was that she mentions that her partner told her that management's treatment of her was unfair. I believe the intent was that such comments were made in confidence. I'm sure Lopez and others in the company know to whom she is referring. Even though she did not specifically name the person, there was no reason for her to potentially make his life at MCB difficult for taking sides with Morgan against Lopez. Also, she mentions not being "thanked" for coming to a demonstration. I don't know about you, but it's rare that I get thanked f
  8. https://nypost.com/2020/10/09/broadway-to-remain-closed-through-summer-2021/ All Broadway shows will remain dark through May 30,2021. This does not bode well for the prospect of any Spring Season for NYCB and ABT.
  9. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/arts/dance/nyc-ballet-alexandra-waterbury.html?searchResultPosition=5 I have attached the original article from the NY Times when this debacle began. It mentions that Waterbury's counsel initially went to NYCB to demand a settlement from NYCB before filing the lawsuit in order to help NYCB avoid bad publicity. NYCB rejected the demand, and the lawsuit was then filed. This was a classic shakedown attempt. Money was always the motive. If Waterbury were really interested in exposing a culture of bad behavior at the company, she would not have first
  10. I think her lawyer must have known there was no chance of success against SAB or NYCB, but decided that getting the opportunity to be on television and in the press was worth it. I remember seeing the attorney on television with Waterbury at least once. Do you remember how so many television stations and print news outlets regularly broadcast the news of Waterbury's lawsuit, the news of her relentless protests outside of the musical West Side Story, and interviews with Waterbury? I've heard nothing about this decision tossing her case out on any television news program. It's time for
  11. https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=fYNcPxH49CK0CbTNsYqAFA== Here is the decision.
  12. Well, justice was certainly delayed, but it was not ultimately denied. The Court has dismissed with prejudice NYCB, SAB, Ramasar, Catazaro and Longhitano from Alexandra Waterbury's lawsuit. Finlay is the only remaining defendant, and there is only one remaining claim against him. Most of the claims against Finlay have been dismissed. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/28/arts/dance/new-york-city-ballet-lawsuit.html
  13. The Met paid approximatley $2.6 million of the settlement, and its insurers paid the rest -about $900K, -according to the article.
×
×
  • Create New...