The results are mixed in an article that was clearly designed to begin salvaging the reputation of the company. Indeed, Abrams admits that such rehabilitation is clearly part of his charge:
“Look, for the client’s interest, I very much hope that we can get rid of these litigations on motions for dismissal,” he says. “But from a personal point of view, I look forward to the chance to defend them against those charges in court. If we have a real trial, people would say terrible things about them and I would be very happy to show that those things aren’t so.”
It takes a moment to realize what Mr. Abrams is saying here: he doesn’t simply want to defend the ratings of S.& P. He wants to rehabilitate their reputation. The word “quixotic” doesn’t seem to capture how quixotic this sounds.
That said, were he to succeed, his S.& P. work would rank with any other odds-beating moment of his life. It would deserve its own chapter in the biography, would it not?
We pose this question, and Mr. Abrams thinks it over for a moment. Then he grins like a man who has just placed a huge roulette bet and is eager for the wheel to start spinning.
“We’ll see,” he says.
The difficulty, of course, lies in the fact that the case may settle and Abrams will never get the chance to clear his clients name in court. As with most civil litigation, the ultimate arbiter of guilt or innocence, therefore, would be... (wait for it)... the court of public opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment