In 1991, Michael Jordan was informed that he had fathered a child with Karla Knafel. Knafel claims that Jordan then agreed to pay his lover $5 million to keep silent, an assertion that Jordan denies.
Many years later Knafel sued on the alleged $5 million promise. Jordan then countersued for extortion. Paternity tests proved that Jordan was not the father of Knafel's child.
In the latest round of the case, Knafel's suit was dismissed. The judge reasoned either that the agreement was tainted by fraud OR that the agreement was unenforceable because of mutiual mnistake.
Here is Forbes on the MJ case:
Judge Stuart E. Palmer ruled in Cook County Circuit Court that any alleged agreement between Jordan and Karla Knafel would be invalid, pointing to definitive tests that showed Jordan is not the child's father.
Palmer writes that "as a result of Knafel's fraudulent misrepresentation to Jordan that he was the child's father or, alternatively, as a result of a mutual mistake of fact, the alleged settlement contract is voidable and ... unenforceable."
Jordan has denied ever agreeing to pay Knafel $5 million.
Jordan's attorney said he considers Friday's ruling a complete victory in the four-year legal fight for the former Chicago Bulls All-Star.
"This is a claim that never should have been made and we are pleased that the court has granted summary judgment in Michael Jordan's favor," Frederick Sperling said.
Jordan sued Knafel in 2002, alleging attempted extortion. In court documents, he contended that Knafel threatened to publicize their affair and had agreed to a $250,000 payment after paternity tests showed the child was not his.
Knafel argued in a counterclaim that she became pregnant in 1991 and thought the baby was Jordan's. When she told him, the lawsuit contended, Jordan agreed to pay her $5 million to keep quiet about the affair.
"When she told him, the lawsuit contended, Jordan agreed to pay her $5 million to keep quiet about the affair."
If that is what was alleged, then the reason for the result is not right. It says either fraud or mutual mistake. But apparently the 5 million was to keep quiet about the affair, which would have included the love-child. Thus, there would have been no mutual mistake at to the affair.
I think the key point is that in a settlement of a disputed claim, both sides know there is a dispute. If the discussion had been along the lines of "this might be your kid, better pay me something" then the deal wouldn't be voidable regardless of how the paternity test comes out. But I sorta doubt that's how it went.
癌平片 神源消癌平糖浆 安康欣胶囊 亮菌口服溶液 参芪颗粒 清肺散结丸牛皮癣 白癜风 鱼鳞病 脂溢性皮炎 脂溢性脱发 斑秃脱发 湿疹 阴虱病 带状疱疹 狐臭 青春痘
Oh yeah. I remember a bit about one of the more famous rap personalities where he'd leave the door slightly open during a hook-up and told his bodyguards to burst in and forcibly eject the lady friend the instant they heard the word 'no'.
It's not just wealthy celebs, either. Even Z-listers have to go through crap like this, e.g Famous Internet Personality Tucker Max got threatened with a bogus rape charge.