
Ellen Pao owes Kleiner Perkins $276,000 for lawsuit costs: judge - kanamekun
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/17/us-kleiner-lawsuit-idUSKBN0OX2WY20150617
======
dylanjermiah
"Pao, who has said she would appeal, has offered to drop her case for $2.7
million, Kleiner Perkins said in a court filing earlier this month."

~~~
rnovak
I get that people will probably disagree, but she just seems to not make very
good business decisions. Maybe I'm way off base, but I've read a bunch of well
qualified lawyers say that juries are just plain unpredictable, and that no
competent lawyer can "guarantee" to win. In that light, even if the $1M
settlement wasn't what you're asking for, I would _think_ it paints a better
picture of you than _losing_ and having to _pay_ the other side? Anyone care
to explain something that I might be missing?

~~~
WalterGR

        Anyone care to explain something that I might be missing?
    

Perhaps her primary concern isn't a cash payout.

~~~
AnkhMorporkian
Were that the case she wouldn't offer to drop her appeal for $2.7 million.

~~~
WalterGR
Her offering a high or higher number doesn't imply that she was only out for
cash. Perhaps that amount was what she considered sufficient to punish KP
appropriately.

And for the record: Consider this statement as me playing the race card.

But look: I wasn't on the jury, and I haven't reviewed the court records, and
like everyone else here I'm playing armchair quarterback.

~~~
AnkhMorporkian
I'm not making any judgements on the case itself; I didn't follow it at all
beyond blurbs I heard here on HN and on reddit. However, part of what I heard
and just now validated is that $2.7 million is the exact amount that her
husband owes in legal fees regarding that ponzi scheme he supposedly ran. If
the numbers didn't match up exactly I might have a different reaction, but
with that settlement amount it seems entirely pragmatic, not principled.

~~~
WalterGR

        $2.7 million is the exact amount that her husband owes in legal
        fees regarding that ponzi scheme he supposedly ran.
    

So, on one hand that sounds suspicious. On the other, I know how quickly the
Internet (flash) mob is to pick up torches and pitchforks.

At the end of the day, what are we to do? Trust juries as the final arbiter,
when we know that they're not infallible? Trust reddit - same, if not more?
Has her husband been convicted of running a Ponzi scheme - or is it merely
"alleged"? Did literally _none_ of EP's lawyers think, "You know... that
number is too obvious. We should fudge it a little."?

Armchair quarterbacks. :)

------
arca_vorago
I highly suggest reading this before forming an opinion on the matter. Keep in
mind who wrote it as well.

[https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/25617...](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/256174979-Kleiner-Perkins-brief.pdf)

~~~
twir
Very interesting - thanks for sharing. Is there a corresponding brief by the
plaintiff? I'd like to see both sides of the story.

------
jrockway
Reddit is a "microblogging company"?

~~~
raldi
Great reporting by the bicycle-repair shop known as Reuters.

~~~
comex
I thought they were an Australian-themed maker of networking equipment that
forwards data between different networks.

~~~
zedadex
> an Australian-themed maker of networking equipment

"We build networks and get in fights"

------
tzs
The long Vanity Fair article from 2013 on Pao and Fletcher that someone else
linked to is actually really interesting, but the comments that included the
link were inflammatory and derailed discussion, so I'm guessing many people
who would have enjoyed the Vanity Fair article skipped it.

Here's the link: [http://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-
fletch...](http://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletcher-
ellen-pao)

AMC or HBO or Netflix could make a pretty interesting TV show out of this.

------
_s
From the prosecution:

[https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1672...](https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1672582/pao-
complaint.pdf)

From the defence:

[https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/25617...](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/256174979-Kleiner-Perkins-brief.pdf)

\--- Personal opinion below ----

Not necessarily relevant (I believe it is) but provides some more of a
background is her husband (whom she married in 2007) -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Fletcher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Fletcher).

Why it's relevant in my opinion? An old saying translates to something along
the lines of "you are the sum of who support, live, work and play with", which
I find tends to hold very true.

From what I've read, but haven't been able to look up sources (someone else
might chip in here) - her demands for payment (settlements) have always
equated to exactly or greater than the sums owed by both her and her husband
to their respective creditors.

Edit: I believe she was discriminated against for not being a
reliable/honest/good person to work with, not because of her gender.

2nd Edit: Having thought about it, I now agree with /u/obstinate below moreso
- her husbands dealings have nothing to do with her. We only know of our
partners doings from our partners themselves, so we can't truly be objective
and tend to err on the side of trust and loyalty.

She felt as if she was discriminated against, so he likely supported her in
her lawsuit. He's lost his business and a home, so of course she'll do what
she can to support him.

I still reserve my personal opinion against both, as others will do from
reading this against me. I'm leaving my original comment and edit for context.

~~~
obstinate
It is disgusting that you think it's acceptable to tar someone with the
_alleged_ crimes of their spouse.

~~~
_s
Trustee report:
[http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/1127fletche...](http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/1127fletchertrustee.pdf)

Token paragraph at the end of page 13:

"Based on the Trustee’s investigation, the answer to the question of why FILB
had no meaningful assets at the time of the bankruptcy filing is principally
that the Funds were victims of a fraud defined by the extensive use of wildly
inflated valuations, the existence of fictitious assets under management
(“AUM”) numbers, the improper payment of excessive fees, the misuse of
investor money, and efforts wrongly to deny the Louisiana Pension Funds a key
benefit of their investment agreement – mandatory redemption of their
investment under certain circumstances. The Funds were also victims of an
environment where self-interest all too often trumped fiduciary obligations."

~~~
obstinate
I don't see anything in here about a conviction, and also nothing about Pao
being the alleged perpetrator, and thus remain in a state of appalled disgust
at what you have written.

~~~
001sky
But that just shows you don't understant the relevant word(s) and/or you
haven't done any homework (like read even the cover page) on the trustee
report.

~~~
obstinate
Why would I read that? A trustee report isn't nor can it be a conviction. And
it also has nothing to do with Ellen Pao, the person we are discussing.

~~~
001sky
1) A nexus with a civil fraud case.

2) That is fundamental due dilligence for any fiduciary appointment.

3) A criminal conviction is un-neccessary to prove civil fraud in relation to
(1,2).

(Those are legitimate issues/topics of dicsussion).

------
minimaxir
If the cost of work is $229k, and the reward is $276k, then why is there a
$47k difference? Making the defendants whole?

~~~
phkahler
Why is there any award at all? I keep hearing that defending a case can
bankrupt a person or company that doesn't have deep pockets even if they are
successful. Why do these guys get reimbursed?

~~~
pixel
Why does she have to pay the legal fees incurred by the defendants because she
tried to extort money? Is that what you're asking? She has to pay because she
lost, and they weren't doing anything wrong.

~~~
WalterGR

        ...she tried to extort money? ...she lost, and they weren't
        doing anything wrong.
    

Sorry, sarcasm doesn't carry well over the Internet...

Are you saying that because she lost that implies that she was engaging in
extortion?

------
atorralb
One thing is for sure, Ellen Pao is not liked in Reddit.

~~~
cjensen
Because of the ban on groups which actively harass others? Or is there another
reason?

~~~
DanBlake
I think its because of the censoring of stuff which is critical of her and her
husband and less about the banning of fat hate subs - See:
[https://twitter.com/arrington/status/609065906900066304](https://twitter.com/arrington/status/609065906900066304)

It especially does not help the fact that her husband was at the helm of a
massive scheme that defrauded untold amounts of public workers in regards to
their pension

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Fletcher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Fletcher)

[http://nypost.com/2015/02/18/case-builds-against-former-
ny-h...](http://nypost.com/2015/02/18/case-builds-against-former-ny-hedgie-
buddy-fletcher/)

Who you are friends with says alot about you. Who you are married to says
much, much more.

~~~
obstinate
Yeah, so, SHE did not censor those posts. Nor did admins. Sub moderators did.
I mean, it even says that in the news articles you posted.

And who hates a woman because of something her husband did? That is just
gross, medieval thinking.

~~~
001sky
You should probably check your facts on this.

~~~
obstinate
I mean, I just read the news articles that that person posted. If you have
evidence to the contrary of these stories, by all means bring it to light.

~~~
001sky
So the larger point is that you are triviallizing legitimate issues whithout
yourself having a grasp on what those issues really are.

~~~
obstinate
Uh. Is this apropos of anything? It seems unrelated to the comment you're
responding to. Are you a bot?

------
pushnpop
Chairwoman Pao owes every penny. She was not discriminated against because she
is a woman, she was discriminated against because she is a terrible employee,
venture capitalist, and person. She sued Kleiner because she wanted to pay off
the debt her scumbag husband owes for fraud.

[http://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-
fletch...](http://www.vanityfair.com/style/scandal/2013/03/buddy-fletcher-
ellen-pao)

~~~
krschultz
Go back to reddit. This comment is over the line. Your other comment in this
discussion is even worse.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9736628](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9736628)

~~~
hoopd
I dislike Pao, the lawsuit, and the surrounding politics but I agree that this
is unacceptable.

------
mberning
This will surely be flagged just like all the other less than favorable posts
about her and her tenure at Reddit.

