Question

What was the result on appeal in the Case Opener involving the claim that Michael Jordan owed $5 million based on his agreement to pay the plaintiff's mother on the premise that he was the father, although it was later determined that the child was not his?

Answer 1

Answer:

Sometimes our justice system can really surprise us. How can a person sue another individual based on arguments that are known to be false? Shouldn't the courts just say no to this kind of lawsuits?

It's plain common sense that the court would dictate that the agreement should be annulled or rescinded based on the mother's fraud attempt or maybe mutual mistake between Michael Jordan and her. Even if they were both convinced that he was the father, after it was proven that he wasn't, the court shouldn't have even wasted its time (and taxpayers money) with this case.