D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
It would be Punks word vs Z-Paks word and the difference is that Punk could have evidence to corroborate his story.
Would he?
To prove negligence you have to do a few things. First, prove that it was Dr Amann's duty to keep this from happening - that is complete. It was his duty as WWE doctor. Next up though you have to prove that he did not act as a reasonably prudent person would in his duties. That is going to be a tough point.
Hang on I'm getting ahead of myself. Did Punk countersue? Or am I yakking a bunch about something that doesn't matter because Punk isn't countersuing?