Redskins

ACLU, Local Media Seeking Dismissal Of Redskins Owner Dan Snyder’s Lawsuit Against Washington City Paper

by Grant Paulsen
View Comments
(Credit: Paul J. Richards AFP/Getty Images)

(Credit: Paul J. Richards AFP/Getty Images)

Grant Paulsen Grant Paulsen
Grant Paulsen is the Redskins beat reporter for 106.7 The Fan and...
Read More

Washington Redskins
Upcoming Games

Buy Redskins Tickets Full Schedule
Sunday Dec 7
vs. Rams
Saturday Dec 20
vs. Eagles
Sunday Dec 28
vs. Cowboys
More from 106.7 the Fan

Redskins owner Daniel Snyder’s lawsuit against the Washington City Paper is still ongoing and several local media outlets and organizations aren’t happy about that.

On Tuesday, an amicus brief was reportedly filed, asking for the dismissal of Snyder’s lawsuit. Among the parties asking for dismissal of the lawsuit are the ACLU of the Nation’s Capital, media outlets and even a DC councilwoman.

According to Cindy Boren of the Washington Post, National Public Radio, Allbritton Communications and WUSA-TV9 are among the media parties uniting to stand up for the Washington City Paper and longtime columnist Dave McKenna.

The lawsuit against Washington’s City Paper was originally filed on February 2nd.

In April, Snyder’s attorney, Patty Glaser, joined “The Sports Junkies” to talk about the lawsuit, along with the allegations that the City Paper printed false information about him. Here is a portion of that interview:

Glaser: “We want a retraction and an apology.”

Junkies: “But I think you would admit that at one point the Attorney General of the United States did write in the case of Snyder Communications, their investigation revealed thousands of instances in which the marketing agents or representatives forged customer signatures. You’ll admit that, right?”

Glaser: “Let me indicate no I won’t admit it, and I’d like to point out to you that there were 77 offices in 17 countries with more than 12,000 employees, and there’s not even an allegation that Mr. Snyder had anything to do with this, had any knowledge of it, was even aware that this had gone on.”

Junkies: “Other than he owned the company and it happened on his watch, and it happened thousands of times.”

Glaser: “There’s absolutely no acknowledgement whatsoever of any wrongdoing, and that lack of acknowledgement occurs after Mr. Snyder sells the company, so I want to be very clear about that number one. And number two, there has never been a suggestion not even remotely that, quote, Dan Snyder got caught forging names as a telemarketer. That’s just pure unadulterated nonsense, that’s not poetic license, that’s not true.

Junkies: “It essentially is Ms. Glaser, because what had happened, he owned the company. Nobody is alleging, and you’re right, nobody is alleging that he actually did the forgery. We all assume that if the company is Snyder Communications and you have thousands of employees that you’re not actually the guy on the phone or actually forging the documents, but it’s like if Steve Jobs runs Apple and they’re putting faulty chips in iPads, ultimately, Steve Jobs is putting faulty chips in iPads.”

Glaser: “It says Dan Snyder caught got forging names as a telemarketer. That’s not license. That is a lie.”

Junkie: “So if the author of the article replaced the words ‘Dan Snyder’ with ‘Snyder Communications,’ then Dan Snyder isn’t filing the lawsuit, correct?”

Glaser: “No that’s not correct. Actually there was never a finding that Snyder Communications got caught forging names as a telemarketer. If the facts come out, and they hopefully will of course, the facts are that it was an independent contractor and even the independent contractor, to my knowledge, and you can correct me on this, never acknowledged any wrongdoing ever, but certainly Dan Snyder did not get caught forging names as a telemarketer with Snyder communications. It just isn’t true.”

To hear the entire interview, click here.

View Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,729 other followers