Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 14th 09, 02:26 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Has Leigh Waived Closed Delegat's Meeting Confidentiality?

I think he may have. He wrote in his letter to counsel (assuming the
letter is from him) the following,

"First,the USCF Delegates are its Board of Directors. I explained this
toCarolyn Crosboll, Mr. Hermanís partner, in Indianapolis. I thought
this was simple enough for you to understand and that you had at a
minimum read the organizationís bylaws. "

By revealing his discussion with USCF counsel at the closed delegates
meeting to, among others, Sam Sloan, it seems to me that he has breached
the confidentiality of what occurred at that meeting. That should open
the door to the entire transcript of that meeting now being made public.
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 14th 09, 04:32 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 319
Default Has Leigh Waived Closed Delegat's Meeting Confidentiality?

On Sep 13, 6:26*pm, MrVidmar wrote:
I think he may have. He wrote in his letter to counsel (assuming the
letter is from him) the following,

"First,the USCF Delegates are its Board of Directors. I explained this
toCarolyn Crosboll, Mr. Hermanís partner, in Indianapolis. I thought
this was simple enough for you to understand and that you had at a
minimum read the organizationís bylaws. "

By revealing his discussion with USCF counsel at the closed delegates
meeting to, among others, Sam Sloan, it seems to me that he has breached
the confidentiality of what occurred at that meeting. That should open
the door to the entire transcript of that meeting now being made public.



Does he have the right to waive it? Leigh (and Polgar and Truong) were
present only for the first half of the closed session, during which
they presented their case. They certainly don't have the right to
waive confidentiality for the "very closed" session, from which they
were excluded. I suppose if Leigh wants to reveal what was said during
the first half, the USCF would be entitled to publish recordings or
transcripts in response. No third-party recording devices were
allowed, but we were told that a record was being made for the
protection of the USCF.
  #3   Report Post  
Old September 14th 09, 11:00 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Has Leigh Waived Closed Delegat's Meeting Confidentiality?

jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 13, 6:26 pm, MrVidmar wrote:
I think he may have. He wrote in his letter to counsel (assuming the
letter is from him) the following,

"First,the USCF Delegates are its Board of Directors. I explained this
toCarolyn Crosboll, Mr. Hermanís partner, in Indianapolis. I thought
this was simple enough for you to understand and that you had at a
minimum read the organizationís bylaws. "

By revealing his discussion with USCF counsel at the closed delegates
meeting to, among others, Sam Sloan, it seems to me that he has breached
the confidentiality of what occurred at that meeting. That should open
the door to the entire transcript of that meeting now being made public.



Does he have the right to waive it? Leigh (and Polgar and Truong) were
present only for the first half of the closed session, during which
they presented their case. They certainly don't have the right to
waive confidentiality for the "very closed" session, from which they
were excluded. I suppose if Leigh wants to reveal what was said during
the first half, the USCF would be entitled to publish recordings or
transcripts in response. No third-party recording devices were
allowed, but we were told that a record was being made for the
protection of the USCF.

The period during the session in which he was there with his clients.
It is not yet completely clear when this conversation with USCF counsel
occurred. We are checking on it.
  #4   Report Post  
Old September 14th 09, 10:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 319
Default Has Leigh Waived Closed Delegat's Meeting Confidentiality?

On Sep 14, 3:00*am, MrVidmar wrote:
jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 13, 6:26 pm, MrVidmar wrote:
I think he may have. He wrote in his letter to counsel (assuming the
letter is from him) the following,


"First,the USCF Delegates are its Board of Directors. I explained this
toCarolyn Crosboll, Mr. Hermanís partner, in Indianapolis. I thought
this was simple enough for you to understand and that you had at a
minimum read the organizationís bylaws. "


By revealing his discussion with USCF counsel at the closed delegates
meeting to, among others, Sam Sloan, it seems to me that he has breached
the confidentiality of what occurred at that meeting. That should open
the door to the entire transcript of that meeting now being made public.


Does he have the right to waive it? Leigh (and Polgar and Truong) were
present only for the first half of the closed session, during which
they presented their case. They certainly don't have the right to
waive confidentiality for the "very closed" session, from which they
were excluded. I suppose if Leigh wants to reveal what was said during
the first half, the USCF would be entitled to publish recordings or
transcripts in response. No third-party recording devices were
allowed, but we were told that a record was being made for the
protection of the USCF.


The period during the session in which he was there with his clients.
It is not yet completely clear when this conversation with USCF counsel
occurred. We are checking on it.



So you're saying that, if Leigh repeated anything that was said in the
closed session, he waived confidentiality for everything that was
said. Of course, there's a catch-22 here, since the only way to verify
that his statement was made in closed session would be for someone /
else/ to violate confidentiality.

The somewhat hysterical tone of Leigh's letter suggests that we may be
caught in the middle of a lawyer fight. Those are fun to watch as long
as someone else is paying.
  #5   Report Post  
Old September 14th 09, 10:40 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default Has Leigh Waived Closed Delegat's Meeting Confidentiality?

jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 14, 3:00 am, MrVidmar wrote:
jkh001 wrote:
On Sep 13, 6:26 pm, MrVidmar wrote:
I think he may have. He wrote in his letter to counsel (assuming the
letter is from him) the following,
"First,the USCF Delegates are its Board of Directors. I explained this
toCarolyn Crosboll, Mr. Hermanís partner, in Indianapolis. I thought
this was simple enough for you to understand and that you had at a
minimum read the organizationís bylaws. "
By revealing his discussion with USCF counsel at the closed delegates
meeting to, among others, Sam Sloan, it seems to me that he has breached
the confidentiality of what occurred at that meeting. That should open
the door to the entire transcript of that meeting now being made public.
Does he have the right to waive it? Leigh (and Polgar and Truong) were
present only for the first half of the closed session, during which
they presented their case. They certainly don't have the right to
waive confidentiality for the "very closed" session, from which they
were excluded. I suppose if Leigh wants to reveal what was said during
the first half, the USCF would be entitled to publish recordings or
transcripts in response. No third-party recording devices were
allowed, but we were told that a record was being made for the
protection of the USCF.

The period during the session in which he was there with his clients.
It is not yet completely clear when this conversation with USCF counsel
occurred. We are checking on it.



So you're saying that, if Leigh repeated anything that was said in the
closed session, he waived confidentiality for everything that was
said.


Possibly.


Of course, there's a catch-22 here, since the only way to verify
that his statement was made in closed session would be for someone /
else/ to violate confidentiality.


All the USCF would have to do is obtain their attorney's affirmation
that the conversation took place during the closed session.


The somewhat hysterical tone of Leigh's letter suggests that we may be
caught in the middle of a lawyer fight. Those are fun to watch as long
as someone else is paying.


I'm beginning to think Mr. Leigh has a personal dislike for Mr.
Kronenberger. No idea why. I think Kronenberger has played it straight
with Leigh and his clients.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Unedited Discovery Conference Transcript Mr.Vidmar[_2_] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 1 April 1st 09 09:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017