Maureen Broderick in the Assessors Of...
Knowyour lawbefore u post

United States

#103 Sep 25, 2011
ryanBlago wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right! Both slander and libel are forms of defamation.
I have seen plenty of claimants walk away with 3-5k, for a lot less than this.
The first tenament of both slander and libel claims that has to be met are that the statements have to be not true and proveable. Nothing that has been stated in any post here has not been truthful. THAT is why there can never be a slander or libel claim brought forth. Secondly there hasnt been a threat issed and therefore there hasnt been a criminal law broken either. Mentioning names (even childrens) and statements of actions simply do not meet the burden of proof needed to bring forth any actionable motions. Look it up.
ideeots

United States

#104 Sep 25, 2011
Yet everyone hides behind fake names. I bet the neighbor that aired dirty laundry puts on her 2nd face and is all smiles and friendly to Sue tomorrow.
That's the sick part. 2 faced.
not the law

New Lenox, IL

#105 Sep 25, 2011
Knowyour lawbefore u post wrote:
<quoted text>The first tenament of both slander and libel claims that has to be met are that the statements have to be not true and proveable. Nothing that has been stated in any post here has not been truthful. THAT is why there can never be a slander or libel claim brought forth. Secondly there hasnt been a threat issed and therefore there hasnt been a criminal law broken either. Mentioning names (even childrens) and statements of actions simply do not meet the burden of proof needed to bring forth any actionable motions. Look it up.
I definitely wouldn't hire you
butt out

Wheaton, IL

#106 Sep 25, 2011
ryanBlago wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right! Both slander and libel are forms of defamation.
I have seen plenty of claimants walk away with 3-5k, for a lot less than this.
Slander is verbal, libel is written, both need to be false. Poor judgment in posting the children's names? Probably, but not a crime. There was nothing written about the children or Mr. Gillooly that was in any way derogatory. It's public knowledge that Mrs. Gillooly has 5 children and that one of her children has special needs. It's been brought up at candidates forums and at school board meetings by Mrs. Gillooly and at least one other board member. Both have a much larger audience than this ridiculous forum. The "neighbor" was responding to comments made by a previous poster and did not start this stupid thread. Obviously there is a lot of raw emotions going on right now with the Gillooly's and some of their neighbors. Maybe it's time for others to butt out and let the parties involved handle this face to face and not on a neighborhood blog. Have a good day.
not the law

Chicago, IL

#107 Sep 25, 2011
butt out wrote:
<quoted text>Slander is verbal, libel is written, both need to be false. Poor judgment in posting the children's names? Probably, but not a crime. There was nothing written about the children or Mr. Gillooly that was in any way derogatory. It's public knowledge that Mrs. Gillooly has 5 children and that one of her children has special needs. It's been brought up at candidates forums and at school board meetings by Mrs. Gillooly and at least one other board member. Both have a much larger audience than this ridiculous forum. The "neighbor" was responding to comments made by a previous poster and did not start this stupid thread. Obviously there is a lot of raw emotions going on right now with the Gillooly's and some of their neighbors. Maybe it's time for others to butt out and let the parties involved handle this face to face and not on a neighborhood blog. Have a good day.
I'm not going to argue with you. I know the 'rules' of defamation. All I said is that she has a civil suit against a few people here. Whether or not she wins, is up to a judge. Ultimately this is her decision, and I wouldn't blame her one bit! Some people here have crossed a line that has irreparable damages. I'm sick to my stomach after having read some of this garbage.
Funnier

United States

#110 Sep 25, 2011
I can bet you by Monday the post by the Ridgefield Neighbors will be gone because Sue and Tim will already have taken action. Then we will see who is right and who is wrong. You people just don't know when to quit. Stay tuned. There isn't much they can do on the weekend but come Monday morning that post will be bye-bye.
new in town

Crystal Lake, IL

#112 Sep 25, 2011
Knowyour lawbefore u post wrote:
<quoted text>
The first tenament of both slander and libel claims that has to be met are that the statements have to be not true and proveable. Nothing that has been stated in any post here has not been truthful. THAT is why there can never be a slander or libel claim brought forth. Secondly there hasnt been a threat issed and therefore there hasnt been a criminal law broken either. Mentioning names (even childrens) and statements of actions simply do not meet the burden of proof needed to bring forth any actionable motions. Look it up.
Speaking of looking it up: A tenament is a densely populated apartment building. A tenet, however, is a principle or doctrine.
Tim

Frankfort, IL

#116 Sep 25, 2011
and yet again, more stellar behaviour by more of our elected New Lenox officials.. priceless
adios

Wheaton, IL

#117 Sep 25, 2011
Funnier wrote:
I can bet you by Monday the post by the Ridgefield Neighbors will be gone because Sue and Tim will already have taken action. Then we will see who is right and who is wrong. You people just don't know when to quit. Stay tuned. There isn't much they can do on the weekend but come Monday morning that post will be bye-bye.
The whole forum needs to go bye bye not just one post. While Topix can be entertaining at times it often goes too far. Racial slurs and vulgarity are very common on this site. If they changed their policy and required people to use their real names when posting people would think twice before posting something that was deceitful, spiteful or just plain mean.
Funny

Ardsley, NY

#119 Sep 26, 2011
Neighbor wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. But I have noticed that the vulgarity pretty much goes away when school is in session. Lots of kids get out here and do not know how to express themselves, their opinions or debate. Must be the result of those over paid teachers not doing an effective job at school? Then again that brings us back to the school board not managing for student success. Uppps, that brings us back to Sue huh? <Sorry
Well at least you are not making gross, personal attacks. This is more of a political post.
Know Before U Speak

Hamlet, IN

#120 Sep 26, 2011
not the law wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not going to argue with you. I know the 'rules' of defamation. All I said is that she has a civil suit against a few people here. Whether or not she wins, is up to a judge. Ultimately this is her decision, and I wouldn't blame her one bit! Some people here have crossed a line that has irreparable damages. I'm sick to my stomach after having read some of this garbage.
You dont have anything to argue "Not the Law" because there isnt any law of which a suit could be filed under. If you are aware of one please do state it. If you are referring to some prior posters insinuating that she has grounds for a slander or libel suit you're 100% wrong. There is both written and pictorial evidence of Sue Gillooleys affair out there and as soon as any lawyer filed a motion for such a suit they would be provided with evidence and the suit would never see the inside of a courtroom. So before you post of knowing what legal recourses Sue has, you should know the full story about this public official's behaviors and how she was caught cheating on her husband. The only reason this seems to have blown up is because she is a public official who wants the public's trust to be able to vote on our childrens school issues but cant make good judgement's about her own childrens lives. If she was just a regular citizen of this town, it would never be an issue because we all know of 100 affairs going on around here. However, when she held herself up for public judgement and confidence and steps out on her own marriage and neglects her childrens needs then she holds herself out there for this kind of public scrutiny. She cant run around town looking to be volunteer of the year and then run around town with a husband and boyfriend and ask people not to judge or talk about it. You cant have it both ways and as far as ANY type of legal recourse....Sue has NOTHING!
Friends for Gillooley

Ardsley, NY

#121 Sep 26, 2011
Know Before U Speak wrote:
<quoted text>
You dont have anything to argue "Not the Law" because there isnt any law of which a suit could be filed under. If you are aware of one please do state it. If you are referring to some prior posters insinuating that she has grounds for a slander or libel suit you're 100% wrong. There is both written and pictorial evidence of Sue Gillooleys affair out there and as soon as any lawyer filed a motion for such a suit they would be provided with evidence and the suit would never see the inside of a courtroom. So before you post of knowing what legal recourses Sue has, you should know the full story about this public official's behaviors and how she was caught cheating on her husband. The only reason this seems to have blown up is because she is a public official who wants the public's trust to be able to vote on our childrens school issues but cant make good judgement's about her own childrens lives. If she was just a regular citizen of this town, it would never be an issue because we all know of 100 affairs going on around here. However, when she held herself up for public judgement and confidence and steps out on her own marriage and neglects her childrens needs then she holds herself out there for this kind of public scrutiny. She cant run around town looking to be volunteer of the year and then run around town with a husband and boyfriend and ask people not to judge or talk about it. You cant have it both ways and as far as ANY type of legal recourse....Sue has NOTHING!
Well at least Sue is strong enough to put herself out there and run for public office unlike you people. She is tuff and will get through all of this nonsense despite all of your rants. We are here for you GILLOOLEY!!!!!!!
Person

Bensenville, IL

#123 Sep 26, 2011
Knowyour lawbefore u post wrote:
<quoted text>
The first tenament of both slander and libel claims that has to be met are that the statements have to be not true and proveable. Nothing that has been stated in any post here has not been truthful. THAT is why there can never be a slander or libel claim brought forth. Secondly there hasnt been a threat issed and therefore there hasnt been a criminal law broken either. Mentioning names (even childrens) and statements of actions simply do not meet the burden of proof needed to bring forth any actionable motions. Look it up.
Person with the clever name maybe should know the law before they post. How do you know any of the comments aren't truthful? Libel isn't a crime but an issue for the civil courts and not criminal courts so you don't have to break a law for it to be valid.

Mentioning the children's names is off pudding, but the libel claims come from how she supposedly treats those children. If even one of those is false then she has an easy case for libel. Maybe you should take your own advice and look it up. Here's a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
not the law

New Lenox, IL

#124 Sep 26, 2011
Person wrote:
<quoted text>Person with the clever name maybe should know the law before they post. How do you know any of the comments aren't truthful? Libel isn't a crime but an issue for the civil courts and not criminal courts so you don't have to break a law for it to be valid.

Mentioning the children's names is off pudding, but the libel claims come from how she supposedly treats those children. If even one of those is false then she has an easy case for libel. Maybe you should take your own advice and look it up. Here's a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
Exactly. Some people would rather keep arguing about nothing. Normally, I'd would join them any day; but this is becoming less entertaining.
not paying for it

Wheaton, IL

#126 Sep 26, 2011
Person wrote:
<quoted text>
Person with the clever name maybe should know the law before they post. How do you know any of the comments aren't truthful? Libel isn't a crime but an issue for the civil courts and not criminal courts so you don't have to break a law for it to be valid.
Mentioning the children's names is off pudding, but the libel claims come from how she supposedly treats those children. If even one of those is false then she has an easy case for libel. Maybe you should take your own advice and look it up. Here's a link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
Whether or not she has a case to pursue a civil suit is not my concern but I better not hear that Dist. 122 is footing any legal bills for this bologna. This has absolutely nothing to do with the school board, it's a personal issue and her responsibility. She was just re-elected and most of this information was out there during her campaigning so it obviously has not impacted her political ambitions in this community.
Told ya so

United States

#127 Sep 26, 2011
It is gone!!!!!! There is no more post #90. I knew that Tim and Sue would take care of it. No one messes with them. Even through divorce, they will stick together. Let's see what further action they take now.
Mustang Dad

United States

#128 Sep 26, 2011
Told ya so wrote:
It is gone!!!!!! There is no more post #90. I knew that Tim and Sue would take care of it. No one messes with them. Even through divorce, they will stick together. Let's see what further action they take now.
I saw Sue and Tim sitting together at the football game this weekend and they invited Todd Dominski to come and sit right next to them just to set the record straight. Todd was on Sue's left and Tim was on her right. Obviously Tim has no problem with Todd which goes to show that all of these accusations are false. They are all good friends and will continues despite all of the rumors. Once the divorce is final it is really nobodies business who Sue keeps her company with anyways. Tim was obviously trying to show Laura that she needs to back off and leave Sue alone. Because divorce or no divorce he will always be very protective of her.
wow

Wheaton, IL

#129 Sep 26, 2011
Told ya so wrote:
It is gone!!!!!! There is no more post #90. I knew that Tim and Sue would take care of it. No one messes with them. Even through divorce, they will stick together. Let's see what further action they take now.
Who are you? You seem to be getting so much pleasure out of this whole thing. So sad for you.
not in highschool

New Lenox, IL

#130 Sep 26, 2011
Mustang Dad wrote:
<quoted text>I saw Sue and Tim sitting together at the football game this weekend and they invited Todd Dominski to come and sit right next to them just to set the record straight. Todd was on Sue's left and Tim was on her right. Obviously Tim has no problem with Todd which goes to show that all of these accusations are false. They are all good friends and will continues despite all of the rumors. Once the divorce is final it is really nobodies business who Sue keeps her company with anyways. Tim was obviously trying to show Laura that she needs to back off and leave Sue alone. Because divorce or no divorce he will always be very protective of her.
That is refreshing to hear. I have stated that I don't know any of them, and rarely pay attention to what goes on with NL politics. I have lived here my whole life and still can't believe how adults act worse than highschool children. The nasty rumors or even 'half truths' really can ruin a family. I am always happy to hear of an amicable divorce when children are involved. Some people on here are so nasty, that I wish some of that space-junk would've fallen on them! It's sad to know that so many people live such pathetic, meaningless lives, that they have to try and bring others down with them.
I'm sure 'their' story isn't over though..(neighbors of sue), it's too bad I won't be able to hear of THEM while they reap what they have sewn.
Told ya so

United States

#131 Sep 26, 2011
wow wrote:
<quoted text>
Who are you? You seem to be getting so much pleasure out of this whole thing. So sad for you.
No so sad for LD And LP. They know who they are. It is over, finally over. Or Sue and Tim will take legal action.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

New Lenox Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
still? 23 min Dennyk 78
Keystone pipeline 28 min Subprime Lender 7
Sexual predators flock together... 56 min MPMMB 12
Conservative morals? 1 hr MPMMB 6
Mr Sulu vs Roy Moore 1 hr MPMMB 85
TYPICAL: Fox News Ducks The Robert Mueller Ind... 13 hr Subprime Lender 10
The Whole Republican tax scam 13 hr Subprime Lender 4

New Lenox Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

New Lenox Mortgages