Volume 9, Issue 12
Dear Equity Uncle,
I’m worried that De Minimis’ recent unprofessionalism will hinder my humble quest for total world domination in the corporate sphere.
Reinvigorated by your comment under last week’s article, Equity has passed many an evening cradling the latest issue of Purely Equilibrium while crafting novel schemes to depose the shameless rabble at DM. But until Equity is invited to his institutionalised media homeland, he is forced to scribble his response here.
The Courts of Chancery have long viewed as unconscionable the undue interference in another’s path to The Big Six. Volumes of case law speak to the law’s unnerving willingness – and equity’s considered preparedness – to exact vengeance on those who dare drag their heels alongside the conveyor to corporate bliss.
The nerve! The inequity! To think so highly of one’s own opinion as to publicly express it – Equity frowns, vigorously.
But wherein lies your remedy? Defamation? This is not Equity’s terrain. Breach of fiduciary duty? Equity is cocked, but yearns for a target. Breach of the MLS’ marketing guidelines? Ahah! A fail-safe claim against DM. After all, nothing burns hotter than the binding gag of one’s own institution.
Until next semester. Or possibly not.
The rest of this week's *bumper* issue:
More Equity Uncle: