- 19,637
- 12,642
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2008
Offering money with conditions is an agreement
Hope you haven't procreated.
A verbal agreement isn't always binding
At least you know what an agreement is
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Offering money with conditions is an agreement
Hope you haven't procreated.
A verbal agreement isn't always binding
If all they had was a verbal agreement it's pretty unlikely that a Court will enforce it. In fact if her end was just getting good grades then it definitely won't beOffering money with conditions is an agreement
Hope you haven't procreated.
A verbal agreement isn't always binding
Girl costs father, Patrick Snay, $80,000 with 'SUCK IT' Facebook post
(CNN) -- The former head of a private preparatory school in Miami, Florida is out an $80,000 discrimination settlement after his daughter boasted about it on Facebook.
Patrick Snay, 69 -- the former head of Guillver Preparatory School -- filed an age discrimination complaint when his 2010-11 contract wasn't renewed.
In November 2011, the school and Snay came to an agreement in which Snay would be paid $10,000 in back pay, and an $80,000 settlement. Gulliver Schools also agreed to cut Snay's attorneys a check for $60,000.
But before the ink could dry on the deal, Snay's daughter took to Facebook, boasting, "Mama and Papa Snay won the case against Gulliver. Gulliver is now officially paying for my vacation to Europe this summer. SUCK IT."
Snay's daughter blasted the message to her 1,200 Facebook followers, which included many current and former Gulliver students. Word of the post spread like wildfire back to school officials.
Within a few days, Gulliver Schools sent a letter to Snay's attorneys stating that Snay had broken a confidentiality agreement and that he would not be receiving the $80,000 settlement.
The agreement stated that neither Snay nor his wife could speak about the settlement to anyone except for his attorneys and other professional advisers.
Snay filed a motion to enforce the settlement and won in a Circuit Court ruling. The school appealed.
A hearing was held to determine if his daughter's knowledge of the settlement and her Facebook post had violated the confidentiality agreement.
"What happened is that after settlement, my wife and I went in the parking lot, and we had to make some decisions on what we were going to tell my daughter. Because it's very important to understand that she was an intricate part of what was happening.
"She was retaliated against at Gulliver. So she knew we were going to some sort of mediation. She was very concerned about it. Because of what happened at Gulliver, she had quite a few psychological scars which forced me to put her into therapy.
"So there was a period of time that there was an unresolved enclosure for my wife and me. It was very important with her. We understood the confidentiality. So we knew what the restrictions were, yet we needed to tell her something," Snay explained in court documents.
Last week, the Third District Court of Appeal for the State of Florida agreed that Snay had, in fact, violated confidentiality and reversed the Circuit Court ruling.
It wrote: "Snay violated the agreement by doing exactly what he had promised not to do. His daughter then did precisely what the confidentiality agreement was designed to prevent, advertising to the Gulliver community that Snay had been successful in his age discrimination and retaliation case against the school.
"Based on the clear and unambiguous language of the parties' agreement and Snay's testimony confirming his breach of its terms, we reverse the order entered below granting the Snays' motion to enforce the agreement."
Snay is now the headmaster at Riviera Preparatory School in Coral Gables, Florida.
.[/QUOTE
I'm sure these parents would trade their idiot for Rachel any day.
Did you not read what I wrote?Offering money with conditions is an agreement
Hope you haven't procreated.
Are you really saying that they should pay for her college education? Or am I reading that wrong? If that's what you're saying, why should they?
No. Pops told me straight up before I even left elementary that not a single penny of his will be going toward my college education.Parents should pay for college if the child is living under the parent roof... however since she left he house willingly this is kind of in limbo..Are you really saying that they should pay for her college education? Or am I reading that wrong? If that's what you're saying, why should they?
IMO if you were paying child support you would have to pay while the child is in college... in some states up to 23.
Aware me why parents SHOULD pay for college? If it's feasible and my kids deserve that kind of support, then yes, I'd be happy to do so.Parents should pay for college if the child is living under the parent roof... however since she left he house willingly this is kind of in limbo..Are you really saying that they should pay for her college education? Or am I reading that wrong? If that's what you're saying, why should they?
IMO if you were paying child support you would have to pay while the child is in college... in some states up to 23.
What are yall talking about? Don't the average parents pay for their child's college? Or at least have some sort of savings plan for it?
You remember that housing bust you heard about in 2008? A lot of that was how parents "paid" for college back then. Much of the cost of college now is due to loans either by the students or cosigned by the parents. While some parents try to save, college is by no means a right for kids. As stated above, kids must earn the right to a higher education. Considering she was expecting her parents to pay $28,000/yr. to send her to an out of state private school, I'm not surprised they weren't jumping up and down to support her despite her bad decisions. Even with her $20,000 scholarship, they would still be on the hook for $92,000What are yall talking about? Don't the average parents pay for their child's college? Or at least have some sort of savings plan for it?
After enduring a media barrage that's lasted more than a week, Rachel Canning, the New Jersey teen who’s suing her parents for financial support, returned home to her family on Tuesday night. But the very next day Canning's lawyer demonstrated that the case is far from over by returning to court, requesting that the parents pay for a guardian to be appointed for their 18-year-old high school student.
“Just a few days ago, Rachel Canning indicated she could not go back home with her parents and she required a promise of some financial assistance going forward," attorney Tanya Helfand wrote in her application to the court, highlighting the teen's quick turnaround in deciding to return to her parents' after living at a friend's for several months. “Now, after speaking with her mother yesterday, she said she is waiving her complaint and is receiving no promises or consideration in return.”
She noted that if her client decides to dismiss the case, it’s important that she does so “of her own free will” and not because of outside pressures, and added, “A psychologist certified that the parents are abusive. School faculty certified that the parents abuse the child.” Helfand also asked that a gag order be placed on all parties regarding the case. But Family Division Judge Peter Bogaard in Morris County denied the request.
......That’s when reports first emerged that Rachel — who had been living at her best friend’s house since November — was suing her parents for immediate support, current private-school fees, and future college tuition. She claimed they’d been abusive and had driven her to develop an eating disorder, and that her dad was “inappropriately affectionate.” The parents, meanwhile, have maintained that their daughter moved out voluntarily after refusing to abide by their rules, and that she’s been abusing alcohol.
Further complicating the situation is the fact that the father of Rachel’s friend — attorney and former freeholder John Inglesino — is bankrolling the lawsuit. And that, notes Naomi Schaefer Riley in aNew York Post opinion piece, is no small detail. “She’s a high-school student whose really bad choices have been encouraged by people much older, who should know better,” she writes. “Her parents’ authority has been undermined by the people they might least have expected — other parents.”