What (not?) to wear for your lawsuit

Hoorah! Remember all that dishy stuff about Hulk Hogan and sex tapes with his ex-best-friend’s wife? And, especially, Bubba The Love Sponge Clem? OMG, do I miss Bubba TLSC!

Okay, well, Bubba TLSC may not himself be back in the news–not by name, anyway–but Lowering the Bar has picked up on one aspect of this complex litigation: Hulk Hogan has also sued Gawker for “publishing a two-minute excerpt of a sex tape…” Which, if I remember rightly, was produced by….Bubba TLSC! Or someone like him.

So. Where are we now?

We are in Sidebar advice territory. Sidebar loves to derive advice about how to get through a lawsuit from other lawsuit news–this is what’s called “experiential”–and the Hulk Hogan item provides an answer to a search string I recently got. Which was, “What should I wear to my deposition?”

I was considering answering this question–although it sounds like something that should have been addressed to a teenage girl magazine, and I am not a teenage girl magazine–and now I have an excuse.

What (not) to wear to your deposition? Or your court appearance, because the rule is pretty much the same?


Take a read:

Source: Lowering the Bar

Judge: Hulkster Limited at Trial to “One Plain Bandana”

The Hulkster also shall not be referred to as “Hulkster,” or even “Hulk Hogan,” Judge Pamela Campbell ruled last week. Instead, the plaintiff shall be referred to by his real name, Terry Gene Bollea, during the trial of his case against Gawker for publishing a two-minute excerpt of a sex tape featuring Mr. Bollea and his former best friend’s wife.

Well, no, that was the opening paragraph addressing the issue of: should you or your opponent get to use your wrestling nom de musculature in your actual lawsuit, the answer to which seem to be, no.

Here’s the what (not) to wear material, which refers to a little picture of a Hulk logo I tried to clip but failed so you’ll have to imagine it:

…the report [from the Tampa Bay Times] also says that the judge “will permit him [only] one ‘plain bandana,'” which of course suggests that he might have been planning to wear something more elaborate, like this “Hulk Still Rules” example. [Here’s where you have to apply your imagination.]  That’s not really consistent with my assumption. But maybe Gawker asked to preclude such attire on the grounds that, for example, it might lead the jury to believe wrongly that Hulk does, in fact, still rule in some legally significant way. If so, it won on that one.

This entry was posted in Law, suits and order and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.