Yes, I am. The letter from Lyons to UT needs to be referred to the U.S. Attorney and the Knox county District Attorney to be evaluated for possible extortion. I say possible because I do not deal in criminal litigation. So, I cannot have a professional opinion on that. Nevertheless, there appear to be some similarities between the letter and the communications that Michael Venetti (sp?) sent to NIKE and for which he was prosecuted. Assuming we have seen Lyons complete letter, he did not contend his client was terminated without cause or contest the firing. His letter simply threatens to embarrass UT regarding matters unrelated to Pruitt's firing if UT does not pay the buyout. Same thing Venitti did. Not only that, the lawyer indicates the "facts" he will use to embarrass UT were developed by his own "investigation," not anything Pruitt told him. Inferentially, this indicates that even Pruitt's lawyer does not believe he has a case. He is just trying to force a payoff because he claims to have evidence of allegations he has developed that he believes UT would not want brought to light. Even worse if even Lyons has nothing from his "investigation."
By the way, if I were Barnes, I would sue Lyons for defamation. Lawyers who pursue causes without merit are allergic to lawsuits against them.
By the way, if I were Barnes, I would sue Lyons for defamation. Lawyers who pursue causes without merit are allergic to lawsuits against them.
