S09.E15: Lei It All On The Table

[ridethemaverick]

56 minutes ago, preciousperfect said:

There is something strange about their marriage for sure. I can't quite put my finger on it. 

I think Kandi's anger originally stems from Porsha dating Block.

If I had to guess, I'd say Todd isn't all that attracted to Kandi anymore and he may also be harboring some resentment toward her for not defending him and especially his mother. 

[cooksdelight]

1 hour ago, WireWrap said:

They can not sue each other or production/Bravo/NBCUniversal for defamation/slander. They sign away those rights when they sign their contracts.

But they can file criminal charges. Ask Kenya. Kandi has a slander/defamation case ripe for the picking as it falls under the umbrella of a crime committed against her that causes harm, financially. I've got a friend who works in production/background and Porsha fucked up. Bravo put it out there, they are protected, however. They will throw their wives to the wolves, sometimes without realizing how it reflects on them.

[ghoulina]

3 hours ago, psychoticstate said:

Add me to the list of people who are surprised that the plus one of an invited guest would bring a plus one.  Huh?

That almost made me feel a bit bad for Phaedra. I'm sure she can handle, but she is the only "single" on there. I think she was expecting Porsha to come with her and make it a bit more balanced, but Porsha brings along Todd as well. 

[Petunia13]

Let me get this straight. The man who busted her windows out, vandalized her car, broke her security cameras, punched her driver, broke her cell phone, that she cries about threatening and stalking her....that is the man Kenya has given her keys to and the responsibility of watching her precious puppies? 

 

[Drumpf1737]

48 minutes ago, ghoulina said:

but Porsha brings along Todd as well. 

With Phaedra essentially throwing Porsha under the bus with this whole debacle and not defending her during the bus ride to glamping; I don't see why Phaedra should expect loyalty or support from Porsha.

Why is Cynthia Bailey still on this show?

Edited March 6, 2017 by Drumpf1737

[psychoticstate]

31 minutes ago, ghoulina said:

That almost made me feel a bit bad for Phaedra. I'm sure she can handle, but she is the only "single" on there. I think she was expecting Porsha to come with her and make it a bit more balanced, but Porsha brings along Todd as well. 

What about Kenya?  She went solo. 

And if Original Recipe Todd hadn't invited Peter, Cynthia would have been there solo. 

At some point Phaedra needs to put her big girl panties on.  If she goes on a couple trip solo, she may be the odd man out.  Or elect not to go.

And Porsha certainly should not have brought a "date", plus one or whatever when she was someone's plus one.  Tacky. 

[RealReality]

1 minute ago, psychoticstate said:

What about Kenya?  She went solo. 

And if Original Recipe Todd hadn't invited Peter, Cynthia would have been there solo. 

At some point Phaedra needs to put her big girl panties on.  If she goes on a couple trip solo, she may be the odd man out.  Or elect not to go.

And Porsha certainly should not have brought a "date", plus one or whatever when she was someone's plus one.  Tacky. 

For all the talking Todd did, he may as well have stayed at home browsing Monster.com and updating his LinkedIn.

[ghoulina]

8 minutes ago, Drumpf1737 said:

With Phaedra essentially throwing Porsha under the bus with this whole debacle and not really her during the bus ride to glamping; I don't see why Phaedra should expect loyalty or support from Porsha.

Oh, I agree with that. But Porsha doesn't even seem miffed about it, does she? I find it odd and I definitely want to see Phaedra called to task as well. But I don't recall Porsha either mentioning Phaedra's involvement to the group OR complaining to Phaedra about her silence when alone. 

 

3 minutes ago, psychoticstate said:

What about Kenya?  She went solo. 

And if Original Recipe Todd hadn't invited Peter, Cynthia would have been there solo. 

At some point Phaedra needs to put her big girl panties on.  If she goes on a couple trip solo, she may be the odd man out.  Or elect not to go.

And Porsha certainly should not have brought a "date", plus one or whatever when she was someone's plus one.  Tacky. 

You're right, I forgot about Kenya. 

And I do think Phaedra can handle being solo. I just was putting myself in Porsha's place. If a single girlfriend invited me as their plus one, I probably wouldn't bring my man along as well. I would see it more as a chance to have girl time, instead of making my friend the 3rd wheel. Plus, yea, it's rude to the original host. 

[ridethemaverick]

Are we really pretending Porsha wasn't obligated to go on this work trip just like everyone else? And that this really is Kandi's personal event? Cuz if so, I can see the rudeness in bringing big Todd. But since this trip reads like every other production setup, I see why Porsha felt justified in bringing him along. 

[ghoulina]

True. Fair point. 

[Ellee]

15 minutes ago, ridethemaverick said:

Are we really pretending Porsha wasn't obligated to go on this work trip just like everyone else? And that this really is Kandi's personal event? Cuz if so, I can see the rudeness in bringing big Todd. But since this trip reads like every other production setup, I see why Porsha felt justified in bringing him along. 

And ....... he probably got paid, too.  :D

Edited March 6, 2017 by Ellee

[byrd]

On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 5:43 AM, renatae said:

First look - wow! So now Porsha's nonsense has escalated to accusing Kandi and Todd of planning to drug and kidnap her and Shamea for sex? This girl is seriously a vicious liar. I'm beginning to wonder if what Phaedra said about the three way relationship actually originated with Porsha.

Meanwhile, there is Phaekdra at church wringing her hands about how all this "back and forth" is tearing everyone apart and she prays Jesus will fix "these girls." As if she had no hand in this at all. One day she is going to turn her head too quickly and both of her faces are going to smack into each other.

I so agree about Phaedra., Jesus need to fix her !!!!! Phaedra is the one that started all of this mess.. I can't wait for the reunion for Kandi to tear her apart. First of all Sharee should have mentioned Phaedra name,  not Porsha's in the beginning on the glamping trip .  Let's lay the blame for this mess where it belongs  at Phaedra's feet...   

[WireWrap]

2 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

I'm aware of that, which was why I was advocating for Bravo to amend Kandi's contract in this particular instance to allow her to sue Porsha. Georgia has a criminal defamation statute, but there are maybe 10 prosecutions a year across the US. I think there is a decent argument to be made that the litigation contract provision is unenforceable, especially when the jurisdiction has no criminal offense that mirrors the tort of defamation.

We've joked about Sonja Morgan's sketchy intern situation and businesses/finances being a cover for human trafficking and money laundering. Can you imagine one of the housewives of NY saying that with no hint or sarcasm or mirth? There has been at least enough shown of Sonja's life to indicate that there might be merit to those claims and warrants some investigation by law enforcement. Or Bethenny's claim that Dorinda and John doing coke. Bravo has to step in because this is heading to a place where castmates can accuse each other of having committed outrageous crimes and there being no way to stop it.

I doubt they could make it retroactive to allow Kandi to sue her.

2 hours ago, RealReality said:

Releases have been thrown out by courts before.  Especially on unconscionability grounds.  Also, kandis contract is with bravo/NBC. Porsha is maybe a third party beneficiary but she is not a party to the contract.  I'm not entirely sure she can claim any rights under the contract if nbc/bravo didn't specifically step in.

So, if kandi were to sue porsha and nbc, then I could see NBC stepping in with the contract.  But if kandi just sued porsha, I'm not sure NBC would really care.

I mean I can see NBC wanting to keep themselves from a suit for vicarious liability as porshas employer.  But if kandi was clear that she has no intention of going after them than they may be okay.

Kandi has signed a contract with this stipulation time and time again, every year she has been on the show, the courts would not throw it out. The contract bars the HWs from suing each other, as well as production/Bravo/NBCUniversal, for any "lies" told about them.

[Househead]

The line that had me cackling was when on the bus from the airport to the Four Seasons, Todd suggested that Kandishould just "let it be"  or something... her response of "okay, Marvin.."  was HI. LARIOUS.  Still chuckling.  But Team Kandi for sure.  Porsha is...something else

[RealReality]

3 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

I doubt they could make it retroactive to allow Kandi to sue her.

Kandi has signed a contract with this stipulation time and time again, every year she has been on the show, the courts would not throw it out. The contract bars the HWs from suing each other, as well as production/Bravo/NBCUniversal, for any "lies" told about them.

That doesn't really matter to determine unconscionability.  I don't even think its a factor courts consider.  It is when you have an issue with the contract that those issues are addressed.  You may sign the same cell phone contract every two years, its when you take issue with the terms or want to sue your carrier that the enforceability of the contract is addressed.  The fact that you signed the contract for years would unlikely be an issue.  Also, courts will refuse to enforce a contract if it is counter to public policy.  Allowing some chick to go around on national TV and call people rapists could rub the wrong judge the wrong way.

And since the contract is between Kandi and NBC, I would question whether or not Porsha can claim any rights under it, as she is, at best, a third party beneficiary and nothing more.  If NBC isn't a defendant (I don't know if they would be a required party to any suit) than they may not really care to enforce their contractual rights.  But if Kandi is clear that she is ONLY suing Porsha, and NBC isn't a party to the suit its unclear that the contract Kandi signed with NBC would come into play.  

I suppose that NBC could later sue Kandi for breach of contract, but for what damages?  A breach of contract claim has to have some damages.  And why would NBC care if it was only Porsha that got sued?  I doubt the contract Porsha signed requires NBC to indemnify her or pay her legal fees, so if NBC didn't pay any money, whats the damage to them for Kandi breaching the contract?

[WireWrap]

1 hour ago, cooksdelight said:

But they can file criminal charges. Ask Kenya. Kandi has a slander/defamation case ripe for the picking as it falls under the umbrella of a crime committed against her that causes harm, financially. I've got a friend who works in production/background and Porsha fucked up. Bravo put it out there, they are protected, however. They will throw their wives to the wolves, sometimes without realizing how it reflects on them.

Slander/defamation are  civil matters not criminal.

11 minutes ago, RealReality said:

That doesn't really matter to determine unconscionability.  I don't even think its a factor courts consider.  It is when you have an issue with the contract that those issues are addressed.  You may sign the same cell phone contract every two years, its when you take issue with the terms or want to sue your carrier that the enforceability of the contract is addressed.  The fact that you signed the contract for years would unlikely be an issue.  Also, courts will refuse to enforce a contract if it is counter to public policy.  Allowing some chick to go around on national TV and call people rapists could rub the wrong judge the wrong way.

And since the contract is between Kandi and NBC, I would question whether or not Porsha can claim any rights under it, as she is, at best, a third party beneficiary and nothing more.  If NBC isn't a defendant (I don't know if they would be a required party to any suit) than they may not really care to enforce their contractual rights.  But if Kandi is clear that she is ONLY suing Porsha, and NBC isn't a party to the suit its unclear that the contract Kandi signed with NBC would come into play.  

I suppose that NBC could later sue Kandi for breach of contract, but for what damages?  A breach of contract claim has to have some damages.  And why would NBC care if it was only Porsha that got sued?  I doubt the contract Porsha signed requires NBC to indemnify her or pay her legal fees, so if NBC didn't pay any money, whats the damage to them for Kandi breaching the contract?

That Kandi signed a contract with that clause for 9+ years does matter and would be taken into account and her case would be thrown out because of it. There is no way that she didn't "understand" what the clause meant and I really doubt that she didn't have legal counsel when she signed her contract. Not to mention than that Todd was a part of production when the met and started dating and that he would understand the ramifications of that clause, after all, he now has his own production company and I would bet my last dollar that his contracts for cast members have the same clause in it.

The contracts specifically bars them from suing fellow cast members for slander/defamation, not just production/Bravo/NBCUniversal. Otherwise, these shows would be nothing more than cast members suing each other. LOL

[SnarkKitty]

On 3/4/2017 at 6:43 AM, renatae said:

Meanwhile, there is Phaekdra at church wringing her hands about how all this "back and forth" is tearing everyone apart and she prays Jesus will fix "these girls." As if she had no hand in this at all. One day she is going to turn her head too quickly and both of her faces are going to smack into each other.

:::flatlined:::

On 3/4/2017 at 0:11 PM, goofygirl said:

Yeah, can't quite figure out why Porsha is on the hate Kandi train.  She's either turned into a nasty little bitch or she was always a nasty little bitch but we're just seeing it now? Who knows.

I'll take "always was" for $200, Alex.

20 hours ago, PhilMarlowe2 said:

I always saw it!!

Yep.

8 hours ago, ghoulina said:

I have no idea why Peter needed to go on this trip. Ugh. And did his shirt say "KING"? It's only just begun, but I'm hoping he gets eaten by a shark. 

Literal LOL! 

8 hours ago, luckyroll3 said:

Porsha's Todd was cracking me up at that dinner.  As soon as they started in on their shit, he had this look on his face like, "oh hell naw; I'm not getting involved with these crazy chics."  Head down, spoon up.   .

Todd2 has clearly been taking his reality significant other lessons from Tamra's husband Eddie. Shit's going down? Eddie's eating up.

[RealReality]

24 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Slander/defamation are  civil matters not criminal.

That Kandi signed a contract with that clause for 9+ years does matter and would be taken into account and her case would be thrown out because of it. There is no way that she didn't "understand" what the clause meant and I really doubt that she didn't have legal counsel when she signed her contract. Not to mention than that Todd was a part of production when the met and started dating and that he would understand the ramifications of that clause, after all, he now has his own production company and I would bet my last dollar that his contracts for cast members have the same clause in it.

The contracts specifically bars them from suing fellow cast members for slander/defamation, not just production/Bravo/NBCUniversal. Otherwise, these shows would be nothing more than cast members suing each other. LOL

It really doesn't matter, people sign contracts for much longer periods of time and their enforceability can still be an issue.  And they can still be thrown out.  As I said, a person can sign a contract with a cell phone carrier for years and years, however, when they sue their carrier is when the enforceability of any clauses, and the unconscionability of the contract would become an issue.  

Even understanding the contract doesn't mean its not  unconscionable or in line with public policy.  Having legal counsel would probably be a better defense of the contract terms, but probably only if the contract was negotiated, or if that clause was subject to negotiation.  However, there is also a public policy exception for the enforceability of contracts.  As I said, the right judge could hold that a contract is counter to public policy if it allows for someone to publicly accuse someone else of rape with no consequences.  

And, as I said, Porsha isn't a party to the contract at all.  So, can she really enforce rights to a contract she isn't even a party to?  I don't know, but I could see where the answer is no.  So if Kandi chooses to ONLY go after Porsha, and not NBC/Universal, I'm not even sure that Porsha can claim any rights seeing as how Kandi never had a contract with her and she is only a third party beneficiary.  The only issue with that is that Porsha would likely try to force NBC/Universal to be a co-defendant since she was "employed" by them at the time.  Whether that could be done is also a question.  But it becomes far less of a question if Kandi is smart and sues Porsha for all the crap she has been saying outside of the show to various people.  A defamation suit requires transmission to only one other person, things don't have to be made super public.  So a few text messages from friends to Kandi about what Porsha is saying would be all she would need for a basic defamation suit.  And it wouldn't involve NBC at all.

Also, can a work or employment contract really control your actions off the job?  If Porsha is telling lies off the clock and not part of her job, and Kandi sues her for that it may be counter to public policy to say that Kandi can't sue for those things outside of "work."  And thats assuming that Porsha can even invoke a contract she isn't a party to as a defense.

Actually, I don't think your last statement holds true.  It is unlikely that any of them have faced the same situation where they have had the money to pursue a case, and such a blatant lie that is criminal in nature and would likely have a foreseeable impact on future earnings and loss of reputation.  I don't think many reality stars have as much money as Kandi, or the future earning capacity that is tied to her reputation as someone who isn't a rapist.

But hey, thats the law for you!  Almost always more complex than people think it is.    LOL.

Edited March 6, 2017 by RealReality

[HunterHunted]

37 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

I doubt they could make it retroactive to allow Kandi to sue her.

Kandi has signed a contract with this stipulation time and time again, every year she has been on the show, the courts would not throw it out. The contract bars the HWs from suing each other, as well as production/Bravo/NBCUniversal, for any "lies" told about them.

It doesn't have to be retroactive. As long as the statute of limitations for civil defamation has not lapsed, Kandi is good.

11 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Slander/defamation are  civil matters not criminal.

That Kandi signed a contract with that clause for 9+ years does matter and would be taken into account and her case would be thrown out because of it. There is no way that she didn't "understand" what the clause meant and I really doubt that she didn't have legal counsel when she signed her contract. Not to mention than that Todd was a part of production when the met and started dating and that he would understand the ramifications of that clause, after all, he now has his own production company and I would bet my last dollar that his contracts for cast members have the same clause in it.

The contracts specifically bars them from suing fellow cast members for slander/defamation, not just production/Bravo/NBCUniversal. Otherwise, these shows would be nothing more than cast members suing each other. LOL

17 states, including Georgia, have criminal defamation statutes. As I've said before, there are barely any prosecutions for criminal defamation.

Technically the contract is between Kandi and Bravo. If Kandi violates it, but Bravo has no interest in suing Kandi for breach of contract there is little that Porsha could do to enforce it. However, it sets a realty bad precedent across the franchises. The better solution would be for a contract amendment on this matter between these parties until the statute of limitations runs. It's going to be a year or two at most.

[RealReality]

3 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

It doesn't have to be retroactive. As long as the statute of limitations for civil defamation has not lapsed, Kandi is good.

17 states, including Georgia, have criminal defamation statutes. As I've said before, there are barely any prosecutions for criminal defamation.

Technically the contract is between Kandi and Bravo. If Kandi violates it, but Bravo has no interest in suing Kandi for breach of contract there is little that Porsha could do to enforce it. However, it sets a realty bad precedent across the franchises. The better solution would be for a contract amendment on this matter between these parties until the statute of limitations runs. It's going to be a year or two at most.

Honestly, I think this would be the only reason NBC might step in on any suit between Kandi and Porsha.

And to me, even thats a maybe.  It may be a good excuse for them to get rid of Porsha again if thats where they are headed.

[HunterHunted]

7 minutes ago, RealReality said:

Honestly, I think this would be the only reason NBC might step in on any suit between Kandi and Porsha.

And to me, even thats a maybe.  It may be a good excuse for them to get rid of Porsha again if thats where they are headed.

I'm sure that Beverly Hills is the one that worried NBC Universal the most. It had quite a few people who said crazy inflammatory nonsense and then another group that has fuck you money. The damages for breach are like $1M. Kyle, LVP, Erika, and Adrienne might not like blowing a million to sue Brandi or Kim or whoever, but they could do it and quickly move on. Though I suspect that they might use this as an excuse to drop Porsha.

They need to implement a a system of fines. Fines for physical contact. Fines for alleging criminal conduct with no proof. Fines for failing to attend the required amount of group events. If your bank account ends up closer to 0 by the end of the season, that should be an indication that you need to check your behavior.

[WireWrap]

38 minutes ago, RealReality said:

It really doesn't matter, people sign contracts for much longer periods of time and their enforceability can still be an issue.  And they can still be thrown out.  As I said, a person can sign a contract with a cell phone carrier for years and years, however, when they sue their carrier is when the enforceability of any clauses, and the unconscionability of the contract would become an issue.  

Even understanding the contract doesn't mean its not  unconscionable or in line with public policy.  Having legal counsel would probably be a better defense of the contract terms, but probably only if the contract was negotiated, or if that clause was subject to negotiation.  However, there is also a public policy exception for the enforceability of contracts.  As I said, the right judge could hold that a contract is counter to public policy if it allows for someone to publicly accuse someone else of rape with no consequences.  

And, as I said, Porsha isn't a party to the contract at all.  So, can she really enforce rights to a contract she isn't even a party to?  I don't know, but I could see where the answer is no.  So if Kandi chooses to ONLY go after Porsha, and not NBC/Universal, I'm not even sure that Porsha can claim any rights seeing as how Kandi never had a contract with her and she is only a third party beneficiary.  The only issue with that is that Porsha would likely try to force NBC/Universal to be a co-defendant since she was "employed" by them at the time.  Whether that could be done is also a question.  But it becomes far less of a question if Kandi is smart and sues Porsha for all the crap she has been saying outside of the show to various people.  A defamation suit requires transmission to only one other person, things don't have to be made super public.  So a few text messages from friends to Kandi about what Porsha is saying would be all she would need for a basic defamation suit.  And it wouldn't involve NBC at all.

Also, can a work or employment contract really control your actions off the job?  If Porsha is telling lies off the clock and not part of her job, and Kandi sues her for that it may be counter to public policy to say that Kandi can't sue for those things outside of "work."  And thats assuming that Porsha can even invoke a contract she isn't a party to as a defense.

Actually, I don't think your last statement holds true.  It is unlikely that any of them have faced the same situation where they have had the money to pursue a case, and such a blatant lie that is criminal in nature and would likely have a foreseeable impact on future earnings and loss of reputation.  I don't think many reality stars have as much money as Kandi, or the future earning capacity that is tied to her reputation as someone who isn't a rapist.

But hey, thats the law for you!  Almost always more complex than people think it is.    LOL.

Had Kandi wanted to sue Porsha, she would have filed already, this was filmed months ago, not days ago. LOL She, Kandi knows she can not sue because she signed away her rights to sue another cast member for lying about her on camera! People can spin all they want, bottom line is Kandi, like the rest of them, gave up the right to sue her fellow cast members when she signed on to this show.

[WireWrap]

34 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

It doesn't have to be retroactive. As long as the statute of limitations for civil defamation has not lapsed, Kandi is good.

17 states, including Georgia, have criminal defamation statutes. As I've said before, there are barely any prosecutions for criminal defamation.

Technically the contract is between Kandi and Bravo. If Kandi violates it, but Bravo has no interest in suing Kandi for breach of contract there is little that Porsha could do to enforce it. However, it sets a realty bad precedent across the franchises. The better solution would be for a contract amendment on this matter between these parties until the statute of limitations runs. It's going to be a year or two at most.

Kandi, as well as the others, signed away any and all rights to sue another cast member for telling lies about them. If Kandi breaks her contract and does attempt to sue Porsha then she will lose her HW paycheck and will be fined big time per their contracts. Oh, and she will be barred from doing any other "reality" TV show for 3 years in addition to the fines.

If Georgia allows for criminal prosecution of defamation that is different but I am also sure that it has tighter/different requirements than a civil case would have and I am not sure that this would make the cut. Do you know how that laws reads and what is required to reach the level of "criminal" prosecution verses "civil" liability?

[WireWrap]

16 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

I'm sure that Beverly Hills is the one that worried NBC Universal the most. It had quite a few people who said crazy inflammatory nonsense and then another group that has fuck you money. The damages for breach are like $1M. Kyle, LVP, Erika, and Adrienne might not like blowing a million to sue Brandi or Kim or whoever, but they could do it and quickly move on. Though I suspect that they might use this as an excuse to drop Porsha.

They need to implement a a system of fines. Fines for physical contact. Fines for alleging criminal conduct with no proof. Fines for failing to attend the required amount of group events. If your bank account ends up closer to 0 by the end of the season, that should be an indication that you need to check your behavior.

I agree that these shows have gotten out of hand, especially Atlanta. But if they fine these women every time another HW objects then no one will say squat and the shows will lose viewers, ratings will drop and they will cancel the show, the same if they allow them to sue each other.

As for blowing off filming, I agree with that but we don't really know what events/gatherings are mandatory attendance or if they, production, are excluding a HW to up the shows drama, something they do fairly regularly, like making 1 or 2 HWs arrive late to an event.
As much as they call this "Reality" it really isn't, it is staged and although there are no "lines" for the HWs to learn they are told what production wants from them. Their words though, are all theirs, not productions. Which makes what Porsha said "vile" and unforgivable and I do think she will lose her Peach this time.

[HunterHunted]

I spoke too soon. Georgia repealed their criminal defamation statute last session. The biggest difference between criminal and civil is that you didn't have to prove damages with criminal.

I'm afraid that OC is the template for how Bravo is going to deal with these issues in the future. The ran a little disclaimer about Vicki's scam charity not being affiliated with Bravo and prohibited the women from attacking each other on social media for a hot second. Ultimately, they kept the two most problematic cast members: Vicki and Kelly.

However, Adrienne Maloof and LVP showed that you can throw some weight around to get certain things excluded from airing.

I don't know where this leaves Kandi.

[RealReality]

54 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

I'm sure that Beverly Hills is the one that worried NBC Universal the most. It had quite a few people who said crazy inflammatory nonsense and then another group that has fuck you money. The damages for breach are like $1M. Kyle, LVP, Erika, and Adrienne might not like blowing a million to sue Brandi or Kim or whoever, but they could do it and quickly move on. Though I suspect that they might use this as an excuse to drop Porsha.

They need to implement a a system of fines. Fines for physical contact. Fines for alleging criminal conduct with no proof. Fines for failing to attend the required amount of group events. If your bank account ends up closer to 0 by the end of the season, that should be an indication that you need to check your behavior.

I wish they would but bravo is happy for the ratings and buzz.  And you KNOW their contract covers them.

46 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Had Kandi wanted to sue Porsha, she would have filed already, this was filmed months ago, not days ago. LOL She, Kandi knows she can not sue because she signed away her rights to sue another cast member for lying about her on camera! People can spin all they want, bottom line is Kandi, like the rest of them, gave up the right to sue her fellow cast members when she signed on to this show.

Maybe, maybe not.  When to file is as much strategy as anything else.

You reference this contract, but porsha isn't a party to the contract so whether she can claim a defense under a contract she is not a party to is a question.  Not to mention contract enforceability as contrary to public policy.

As I've said, the issues are not nearly as cut and dry as people would like to think they are.

Furthermore, defamation doesn't require a public airing.  Telling just one other person can count as defamation.  Meaning kandi can sue porsha for saying the same thing off the air.

Kandi herself said that if porsha kept it up she would sue her.   And since kandi came to the dinner with that knowledge, it's reasonable to think she spoke to her attorney before saying it.

But as I said, the law is almost always more complex than people think it is.  It's why they make you attend law school and take a super difficult test before you're allowed to practice.  LOL.  

If it was that cut and dry, i would be out of a job :)

Although now that we're talking about it I'm gonna see if I can find an old torts outline so I can check the elements of defamation.  And the rights of third party beneficiaries. I'm about 70% sure that porsha would have to claim some sort of detrimental reliance on the contract to assert any rights under if if NBC wasn't a party.

Edited March 7, 2017 by RealReality

[zoeysmom]

49 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

I'm sure that Beverly Hills is the one that worried NBC Universal the most. It had quite a few people who said crazy inflammatory nonsense and then another group that has fuck you money. The damages for breach are like $1M. Kyle, LVP, Erika, and Adrienne might not like blowing a million to sue Brandi or Kim or whoever, but they could do it and quickly move on. Though I suspect that they might use this as an excuse to drop Porsha.

They need to implement a a system of fines. Fines for physical contact. Fines for alleging criminal conduct with no proof. Fines for failing to attend the required amount of group events. If your bank account ends up closer to 0 by the end of the season, that should be an indication that you need to check your behavior.

The ones with fuck you money never make the crazy inflammatory nonsense statements.  It is always the broke ones because they have nothing to lose.  I would never say something believing a party could not sue me based on a talent contract.  Ask Brandi Glanville, she lost with her claim of no suing as part of the cast, in the Joanna Krupa matter.   

I agree they should be fined for various offenses, unfortunately the other side of that is they might expect to get paid from "bringing it". 

39 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Kandi, as well as the others, signed away any and all rights to sue another cast member for telling lies about them. If Kandi breaks her contract and does attempt to sue Porsha then she will lose her HW paycheck and will be fined big time per their contracts. Oh, and she will be barred from doing any other "reality" TV show for 3 years in addition to the fines.

If Georgia allows for criminal prosecution of defamation that is different but I am also sure that it has tighter/different requirements than a civil case would have and I am not sure that this would make the cut. Do you know how that laws reads and what is required to reach the level of "criminal" prosecution verses "civil" liability?

We have no idea one Kandi's contract with Bravo contains.  Neither does Porsha.  They contract individually not collectively.  We have no idea if Kandi would be fired for suing, if they fire her they can't bar her from doing other reality shows.   That is just basic contract law.  Most of the RH contracts are three years with options.   Kandi is a special snowflake because she came to Bravo with experience and demands.   

[Jel]

Question for the lawyers -- is every contract enforceable? 

[RealReality]

7 minutes ago, Jel said:

Question for the lawyers -- is every contract enforceable? 

No.  :)

There are defenses to contract formation that make the contract either void or voidable.  

Unconscionability, mistake, frustration of purpose, illegality, public policy, duress, inability to form the intent to be bound. And thats just off the top of my head.

 

Also if terms arent clear enough for the court to figure out what the parties meant to agree to the contract can't be enforced.

Edited March 7, 2017 by RealReality
Silly autocorrect!!

[WireWrap]

12 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

The ones with fuck you money never make the crazy inflammatory nonsense statements.  It is always the broke ones because they have nothing to lose.  I would never say something believing a party could not sue me based on a talent contract.  Ask Brandi Glanville, she lost with her claim of no suing as part of the cast, in the Joanna Krupa matter.   

I agree they should be fined for various offenses, unfortunately the other side of that is they might expect to get paid from "bringing it". 

We have no idea one Kandi's contract with Bravo contains.  Neither does Porsha.  They contract individually not collectively.  We have no idea if Kandi would be fired for suing, if they fire her they can't bar her from doing other reality shows.   That is just basic contract law.  Most of the RH contracts are three years with options.   Kandi is a special snowflake because she came to Bravo with experience and demands.   

Did she have experience in "Reality TV"? I am not so sure that she wouldn't sign the same contract that the rest did or that she was some special snowflake when she signed.

Edited March 7, 2017 by WireWrap

[WireWrap]

23 minutes ago, HunterHunted said:

I spoke too soon. Georgia repealed their criminal defamation statute last session. The biggest difference between criminal and civil is that you didn't have to prove damages with criminal.

I'm afraid that OC is the template for how Bravo is going to deal with these issues in the future. The ran a little disclaimer about Vicki's scam charity not being affiliated with Bravo and prohibited the women from attacking each other on social media for a hot second. Ultimately, they kept the two most problematic cast members: Vicki and Kelly.

However, Adrienne Maloof and LVP showed that you can throw some weight around to get certain things excluded from airing.

I don't know where this leaves Kandi.

Adrienne had it in her contract that her kids were not to be on the show in any way, so that is how she was able to get Bravo to edit everything out that season. Remember, even she did not threaten to sue Brandi, that C&D letter was sent to a former Attorney of hers that befriended and blabbed her secrets to Brandi, not Brandi herself.

I don't know that Kandi has any other recourse than any other HW when someone lies about them, use SM and do the interview tours calling the other HW a LIAR and getting their story out. She can put pressure on production/Bravo to fire Porsha and she will have no problem getting the rest to join in that demand and I think that is what she will do. I also think she will be successful in getting Porsha fired but I see Phaedra coming back claiming she didn't "know" Porsha was like "that".  

[zoeysmom]

6 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Did she have experience in "Reality TV"? I am not so sure that she wouldn't sign the same contract that the rest did or that she was some special snowflake when she signed.

Well based on past history Kandi and her ace attorney Phaedra sued Kim Zolciak.  So I really don't think I am too off base here.  I can almost guarantee you for example Eden Sassoon contract looks nothing like LVP's or Bethenny's.

[WireWrap]

Just now, zoeysmom said:

Well based on past history Kandi and her ace attorney Phaedra sued Kim Zolciak.  So I really don't think I am too off base here.  I can almost guarantee you for example Eden Sassoon contract looks nothing like LVP's or Bethenny's.

Kandi signed her first contract well before Tamra did her first season, so I would imagine that her contract has the same clause in it barring her from suing a fellow cast member because of lies.

[Jel]

1 minute ago, WireWrap said:

Kandi signed her first contract well before Tamra did her first season, so I would imagine that her contract has the same clause in it barring her from suing a fellow cast member because of lies.

Wouldn't that depend on the nature of the lie though? It's one thing to say something potentially (and simply) embarrassing and another to say someone has committed or conspired to commit a crime, wouldn't that factor into a judge's decision?

[zoeysmom]

3 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Kandi signed her first contract well before Tamra did her first season, so I would imagine that her contract has the same clause in it barring her from suing a fellow cast member because of lies.

Actually Kandi came on Season 2, 2009, Tamra joined RHOC in 2007.  So Tamra preceded Kandi.

My basis for saying Kandi's contract may be wildly different is her copyrighted material. Plus everyone is always angry she is the top wage earner.  When the others started Season 1 they were basically making car fare. 

[zoeysmom]

4 minutes ago, Jel said:

Wouldn't that depend on the nature of the lie though? It's one thing to say something potentially (and simply) embarrassing and another to say someone has committed or conspired to commit a crime, wouldn't that factor into a judge's decision?

I always look at it this way, there may be a clause in the contract and there is no guarantee until tested, it is enforceable or even a valid defense. 

From a practical point Porsha made some pretty serious allegations, drugs, kidnap and rape.  I am trying to think what her defense would be she didn't accuse Todd and Kandi  of animal cruelty, domestic terrorism or child abuse?  I am sure there is someone out there willing to say Kandi laid claims to those offenses.

[zoeysmom]

Reason to confirm Porsha doesn't get it:  http://www.bravotv.com/the-daily-dish/porsha-williams-explains-how-kandi-burruss-lesbian-rumors-started  Classic RH defense, well I am over it.  And of course Porsha is such an idiot she claims Kandi is really in love her.  Stop Porsha, just stop, don't go for the cheap shot.  And Phaedra is above it all, because she has 5 college degrees and does business at City Hall everyday and can't act like these fools.  Phaedra you married a felon, denied being pregnant at the time, lived with a man, and went to the mat holding on to him, while he was ripping off retirees.  No one takes you seriously.

[Talented Tenth]

20 hours ago, Jamie Satyr said:

You know it's Phaedra; a big rumor monger! You saw her make up that $#!t about Kandi and Shamea! Frick & Frack are both bent! ;-)

How is it being determined that Phaedra made it up?

[TexasGal]

22 hours ago, Gillian Rosh said:

 

And seeing Phaedra talking about a restoration service juxtaposed with her shadiness and treachery was...surreal.

When Phaedra was talking about a restoration service, my brain went to her funeral home director story line and I could not figure out what she was talking about - she's going to demonstrate embalming to the other HWs?  Took me a minute to catch up, but I guess it would be just as valid as what she's actually planning.

[zoeysmom]

6 minutes ago, Talented Tenth said:

How is it being determined that Phaedra made it up?

If the principles deny it there are only two options, Phaedra made it up or as the smooth professional she is failed to adequately investigate the claims from her sources.  They can sit around all day long and claim they read it, heard it from someone but at the end of the line it is the person making the statement responsibility to fact check or not pass it on. 

This is an entire season of Frick & Frack making dangerous claims because some dare mention the reality of these two very angry, petty women.  No one owes them to participate in their screen of BS while the repeat unsubstantiated rumors.  Phaedra has lost her big suit for defamation because once things got rolling she would not cooperate.  The woman cross complained and Phaedra ended up out of court after four plus attorneys.  Phaedra is an attack goat.

[Roxy]

Someone should discuss Joanna Krupa and Brandi Glanville with Porscha. Maybe her BFF, Phaedra, who tells us what a good lawyer she is all the time. Porscha needs to get that repeating a rumor can be libel. She's trying to back off it, as maybe it's been explained to her, but the damage is done. How long until Phaedra starts to back away and kiss up to the others as Porscha will be persona non grata?  

I agree with whoever said that Phaedra set this up. She did and got busted by accident. I don't think she can get out of it now as it was caught on tape. She's just staying still until she it shakes out and she can get a new strategy. But this makes Porscha look even more moronic- if that's possible- and mean spirited. It makes Phaedra look hypocritical and evil. 

Kandi is a bonafide freak- out and proud- so I don't think it makes her look like anything but a woman who doesn't want to be slandered. Anyone in the media with a brain knows that if you put out a rumor that is shadey, you need to back off once it starts to stink. Porscha should have just taken it back immediately and moved on. This is making everything worse. Even if there would be some truth to the "rape" conspiracy, without proof it's too bad to repeat on national television. She is a real, legit moron. And they are rare but exist. Look at Brandi Glanville............

Edited March 7, 2017 by Roxy

[WireWrap]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

Wouldn't that depend on the nature of the lie though? It's one thing to say something potentially (and simply) embarrassing and another to say someone has committed or conspired to commit a crime, wouldn't that factor into a judge's decision?

Except that Porsha said they "talked" about it, not that they actually attempted to commit a crime. I dislike what Porsha said, I am not defending what she did at all but IMO, Kandi can't sue her for saying it. Oh, and don't forget that Kandi's mother quotes "Word on the street" rumors about the others all the time, including that Todd's mom was a hooker and his father a pimp. 

1 hour ago, zoeysmom said:

Actually Kandi came on Season 2, 2009, Tamra joined RHOC in 2007.  So Tamra preceded Kandi.

My basis for saying Kandi's contract may be wildly different is her copyrighted material. Plus everyone is always angry she is the top wage earner.  When the others started Season 1 they were basically making car fare. 

That doesn't mean that Kandi's contract is any different than the others. Adrienne had teams of lawyers and a lot of money but she wasn't able to sue Brandi!

25 minutes ago, Roxy said:

Someone should discuss Joanna Krupa and Brandi Glanville with Porscha. Maybe her BFF, Phaedra, who tells us what a good lawyer she is all the time. Porscha needs to get that repeating a rumor can be libel. She's trying to back off it, as maybe it's been explained to her, but the damage is done. How long until Phaedra starts to back away and kiss up to the others as Porscha will be persona non grata?  

I agree with whoever said that Phaedra set this up. She did and got busted by accident. I don't think she can get out of it now as it was caught on tape. She's just staying still until she it shakes out and she can get a new strategy. But this makes Porscha look even more moronic- if that's possible- and mean spirited. It makes Phaedra look hypocritical and evil. 

Kandi is a bonafide freak- out and proud- so I don't think it makes her look like anything but a woman who doesn't want to be slandered. Anyone in the media with a brain knows that if you put out a rumor that is shadey, you need to back off once it starts to stink. Porscha should have just taken it back immediately and moved on. This is making everything worse. Even if there would be some truth to the "rape" conspiracy, without proof it's too bad to repeat on national television. She is a real, legit moron. And they are rare but exist. Look at Brandi Glanville............

There difference between Joanna/Brandi and Kandi/Porsha was that when Brandi made her nasty comment, Joanna was no longer a HW, Miami had already been cancelled and they were on different HW shows, therefore not fellow cast members. Brandi made the mistake believing that their contracts protected them even after a HW is fired/show cancelled and/or with HWs on a different Bravo show and she was wrong both ways.

Sadly I think Porsha already knew that the only HW that would willingly film with her, before her comment, was Phaedra, which is why she pretty much said she would be loyal to Phaedra no matter what on WWHL last night.

[zoeysmom]

5 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Except that Porsha said they "talked" about it, not that they actually attempted to commit a crime. I dislike what Porsha said, I am not defending what she did at all but IMO, Kandi can't sue her for saying it. Oh, and don't forget that Kandi's mother quotes "Word on the street" rumors about the others all the time, including that Todd's mom was a hooker and his father a pimp. 

That doesn't mean that Kandi's contract is any different than the others. Adrienne had teams of lawyers and a lot of money but she wasn't able to sue Brandi!

There difference between Joanna/Brandi and Kandi/Porsha was that when Brandi made her nasty comment, Joanna was no longer a HW, Miami had already been cancelled and they were on different HW shows, therefore not fellow cast members. Brandi made the mistake believing that their contracts protected them even after a HW is fired/show cancelled and/or with HWs on a different Bravo show and she was wrong both ways.

Sadly I think Porsha already knew that the only HW that would willingly film with her, before her comment, was Phaedra, which is why she pretty much said she would be loyal to Phaedra no matter what on WWHL last night.

What Porsha said was that Kandi told the mysterious someone that . . . . In the statement was drugging someone, taking them to a sex dungeon and having their way with them.  All of those are illegal acts also known as crimes.  Kandi was wise when she produced the receipts as it showed Porsha was the aggressor and Porsha had no reason to fear her and Schema claimed none of it was true.  Mama Joyce has absolutely zero to do with what Porsha said.  Beyond zero.

Adrienne, being of smart money knew it was a waste of paper to sue Brandi, she was after trying to get the comments off the air and was successful.   Bottom line, the comments about her children were true.  There is no comparison.  It was never about money it was about keeping it off the air.  Brandi made it far bigger than it was. 

Miami wasn't cancelled they were airing the Reunion, when Brandi made the comment and Brandi comments about Joanna and Mohamed were part of the Reunion, so that means nothing.  Brandi was relying on some sort of immunity based on being on Bravo and being on WWHL.  It failed.  Brandi is still being sued.  Brandi biggest issue is after being asked to cease and desist she kept it up and Porsha seems to following suit. 

Porsha is full of crap she had everyone but Kenya in her corner the first season.  The husbands loved, loved Kordell.  The only time she took some heat was when she didn't want to go to the strip club.  I still believe the night that Porsha went ape on Kenya, that Phaedra and Nene had contributed to the attack-only I think they believed Porsha was going to pull out a handful of weave.  Why else would Nene sit on Porsha and cover her mouth? 

[RealReality]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

Wouldn't that depend on the nature of the lie though? It's one thing to say something potentially (and simply) embarrassing and another to say someone has committed or conspired to commit a crime, wouldn't that factor into a judge's decision?

Depends.  If a contract barred k from suing p  (I'm my phone so forgive the abbreviations) then k would file suit and p would respond with the affirmative defense that k is contractually barred from suing her.

At that point the judge would consider arguments from k on why the contract should not apply.  She could argue that it's contrary to public policy to enforce a contract that allows p to call her a rapist on national tv.

 She could also argue that p is not a party to the contract and therefore should not be protected by it.  In which case p would argue she is a third party beneficiary of the contract.  The purpose of the contract is to protect bravos back, not porshas.  She could also argue that she isn't suing for what p said on tv, but what she told others off camera, so the contract shouldnt apply at all.

Edited March 7, 2017 by RealReality
Most likely to

[appledumpling]

19 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

First off, just because you didn't know about Bill Cosby doesn't mean it caught everyone else by surprise. I've known about it for at least a decade. It's the same way that lots of folks knew about Roger Ailes and Charlie Sheen. Hell, it took Kelly Preston more than 20 years to admit Charlie Sheen shot her. People like Cosby, Ailes, and Sheen thrive because our society is so misogynistic that women's stories aren't believed. Our agency (sexual or otherwise) isn't tolerated and is condemned.

 

I wasn't surprised, I just didn't believe it as first.  No different from you believing Kandi and defending her without proof, just her word.   I wasn't taking some chick's word for it just like your not taking Porsha's word for it.   You have your beliefs let me have mine.   It doesn't make yours right and mines wrong or vice versa.  It just is.

Women have to tell their stories  and not hold them for 30, 40 & 50 years in order for them to be believed or not.  All it does is protect the man and allows other women to become his prey.  

 

19 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

Which brings me to my next point, that is some false fucking equivalency to compare a woman who is empowered in her sexuality to a rapist. Just because she uses sex toys and had sex with a woman, Kandi is akin to a predator? Let's see who else would qualify as a predator under the freakazoid rules: Ellen Degeneres, Lily Tomlin, Kristen Stewart, Cynthia Nixon, and Chirlane McCray.

No this is some false fuckery; don't project your way of thinking on to me.  I use FREAKAZOID as a term of endearment, how you took it is on you.  Your thinking too much into it, just because it's a negative or derogatory term to you doesn't mean it is for me.  You don't even know if I consider myself one or if I'm straight, gay, bi, or if I use sex toys yet you judged me because I called Kandi a FREAKAZOID.  Fuck this noise!

Also the use of the word predator is all yours.  More over thinking.

 

20 hours ago, HunterHunted said:

Fuck this noise. Porsha spits these lies about Kandi because she knows that this group is filled with homophobic misogynists

Good since both are part of the group they're both getting back what they put out.

[WireWrap]

57 minutes ago, zoeysmom said:

What Porsha said was that Kandi told the mysterious someone that . . . . In the statement was drugging someone, taking them to a sex dungeon and having their way with them.  All of those are illegal acts also known as crimes.  Kandi was wise when she produced the receipts as it showed Porsha was the aggressor and Porsha had no reason to fear her and Schema claimed none of it was true.  Mama Joyce has absolutely zero to do with what Porsha said.  Beyond zero.

Adrienne, being of smart money knew it was a waste of paper to sue Brandi, she was after trying to get the comments off the air and was successful.   Bottom line, the comments about her children were true.  There is no comparison.  It was never about money it was about keeping it off the air.  Brandi made it far bigger than it was. 

Miami wasn't cancelled they were airing the Reunion, when Brandi made the comment and Brandi comments about Joanna and Mohamed were part of the Reunion, so that means nothing.  Brandi was relying on some sort of immunity based on being on Bravo and being on WWHL.  It failed.  Brandi is still being sued.  Brandi biggest issue is after being asked to cease and desist she kept it up and Porsha seems to following suit. 

Porsha is full of crap she had everyone but Kenya in her corner the first season.  The husbands loved, loved Kordell.  The only time she took some heat was when she didn't want to go to the strip club.  I still believe the night that Porsha went ape on Kenya, that Phaedra and Nene had contributed to the attack-only I think they believed Porsha was going to pull out a handful of weave.  Why else would Nene sit on Porsha and cover her mouth? 

Adrienne never sent Brandi a C&D letter because of their contract, otherwise, she would have. Brandi is being sued because what she said wasn't protected because 1, she/Joanna were not "fellow" cast mates/members and 2, because Miami ended when the reunion was filmed, weeks before Brandi made that comment on WWHL. And yes, because she just had to keep spouting that lie but again, she was not protected by her Bravo contract like she thought/believed she was. She even said that Joanna could not sue her because of that clause. Little did she know that that clause was never extended to HWs on different shows or former HWs.

I disagree that she had everyone in her corner her first season. They were nice to her but no one connected/befriended her, she was the odd one out. I agree that Porsha should have shut up after she apologized but I still don't think Kandi can do anything legal about it.

I think it is a real possibility that there was a plan by Nene/Phaedra at that reunion but I am not convinced Porsha planned that attack, it looked too spontaneous IMO. Maybe they just pumped Porsha up by telling her not to put up with Kenya's crap and Porsha reacted to it stupidly by attacking her, even though she warned Kenya not do point the scepter or the bullhorn at her a couple of times before she reacted either time. Nene's claim was that she didn't want Porsha to say something that would make matters worse and get her fired and I think that is also possible.

[zoeysmom]

5 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

Adrienne never sent Brandi a C&D letter because of their contract, otherwise, she would have. Brandi is being sued because what she said wasn't protected because 1, she/Joanna were not "fellow" cast mates/members and 2, because Miami ended when the reunion was filmed, weeks before Brandi made that comment on WWHL. And yes, because she just had to keep spouting that lie but again, she was not protected by her Bravo contract like she thought/believed she was. She even said that Joanna could not sue her because of that clause. Little did she know that that clause was never extended to HWs on different shows or former HWs.

I disagree that she had everyone in her corner her first season. They were nice to her but no one connected/befriended her, she was the odd one out. I agree that Porsha should have shut up after she apologized but I still don't think Kandi can do anything legal about it.

I think it is a real possibility that there was a plan by Nene/Phaedra at that reunion but I am not convinced Porsha planned that attack, it looked too spontaneous IMO. Maybe they just pumped Porsha up by telling her not to put up with Kenya's crap and Porsha reacted to it stupidly by attacking her, even though she warned Kenya not do point the scepter or the bullhorn at her a couple of times before she reacted either time. Nene's claim was that she didn't want Porsha to say something that would make matters worse and get her fired and I think that is also possible.

Adrienne's attorneys didn't send Brandi a letter because she did not have a business contract with Adrienne and Paul.  It had nothing to do with Bravo contracts.  Tamra sent and delivered Jeana a C&D.  I have read Tamra's contract and there is nothing that prevents the sending of C&D's.  What Brandi believed ended up biting her in the ass.  Brandi has a contract for services and believed she had some sort of immunity to say whatever she wanted and she wrong. 

Again Miami wasn't cancelled, it was airing when Brandi made the comment.  There was no reason to have Brandi on the WWHL that night other than the fact that her name was brought up during the Miami Reunion.  Making defamatory statements has nothing to so with whether a RH show is on the air or cancelled it has everything to do with defaming someone.

What was Phaedra's big reach out to Porsha?  It is simply revisionist history.  I would say up until this year Kandi and Porsha never had an issue.  When Cynthia and Porsha had their moment Kandi stated they had been calling each other bitches all day.  To me, Porsha seems to be over reacting to something that is not a big deal.  She was mad that Kandi talked about an ON AIR CONVERSATION she had with Phaedra and quite honestly inserted herself where she should not have tread. 

Long ago I realized suing someone and being successful in a lawsuit are not synonymous.   

Porsha should have been fired.  Three on air physical altercations. . . unconscionable. 

[Adeejay]

9 hours ago, ridethemaverick said:

 

Right LOL. Miss "y'all know how I am about my husband!" You mean the same husband you let your hyena of a mother and messy bitch of an employee dog the hell out of? With nary a word? Girl, bye. 

Not to mention how she allowed her mother to talk about poor Miss Sharon.  May she rest in peace! 

[phoenix780]

I'm having mixed feelings. On the one hand, I feel dumber following these franchises, and I feel dirty watching shows where storylines include fraud and imprisonment, faked cancer, and, now, all of this crap. And yet, I think I know more about bankruptcy and contract law. Does that good offset the rest? 

[WireWrap]

1 hour ago, zoeysmom said:

Adrienne's attorneys didn't send Brandi a letter because she did not have a business contract with Adrienne and Paul.  It had nothing to do with Bravo contracts.  Tamra sent and delivered Jeana a C&D.  I have read Tamra's contract and there is nothing that prevents the sending of C&D's.  What Brandi believed ended up biting her in the ass.  Brandi has a contract for services and believed she had some sort of immunity to say whatever she wanted and she wrong. 

Again Miami wasn't cancelled, it was airing when Brandi made the comment.  There was no reason to have Brandi on the WWHL that night other than the fact that her name was brought up during the Miami Reunion.  Making defamatory statements has nothing to so with whether a RH show is on the air or cancelled it has everything to do with defaming someone.

What was Phaedra's big reach out to Porsha?  It is simply revisionist history.  I would say up until this year Kandi and Porsha never had an issue.  When Cynthia and Porsha had their moment Kandi stated they had been calling each other bitches all day.  To me, Porsha seems to be over reacting to something that is not a big deal.  She was mad that Kandi talked about an ON AIR CONVERSATION she had with Phaedra and quite honestly inserted herself where she should not have tread. 

Long ago I realized suing someone and being successful in a lawsuit are not synonymous.   

Porsha should have been fired.  Three on air physical altercations. . . unconscionable. 

Yes, the reunion was on air the night Brandi made that comment, it was the final reunion episode I believe. And Yes, they brought her on because of Adriana's/Joanna's comments on the reunion.

Sending a C&D letter does not equate to filing a lawsuit and Tamra never filed a lawsuit against Jenna, who still did not keep her mouth shut, either. LOL Oh, and did we ever see the actual letter or just a folded piece of paper? I don't think Bravo showed it to us but I might not remember seeing it.

As for Phaedra reaching out to Porsha? That is what Porsha said on WWHL, it is not my opinion, it is hers. As far as I can tell, Phaedra is the only one that willingly films with Porsha, for obvious reasons, one on one. And, I don't think Kandi has ever done anything to hurt Porsha but she hasn't exactly been more than just friendly with her either.

Look, I think Porsha was wrong to do/say what she did, 100%, there is no excuse for it at all. It was ugly and vile but I don't think Kandi can or will sue her over it. As for Porsha getting fired, I believe that is what will happen unless something else happens that we don't know about yet but Porsha made it clear on WWHL that she is ride or die for Phaedra no matter what and she is sticking to her kidnap/drug story/lie.