|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2011 11:10 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm Posts: 5046 Been Liked: 334 times
|
c. staley wrote: As always, thanks for the link, Chip. Printed and saved. I'm not in the business of law. Is this site open to public subscription?
_________________ "No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 4:39 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: c. staley wrote: As always, thanks for the link, Chip. Printed and saved. I'm not in the business of law. Is this site open to public subscription? yes it is. It costs 8 cents per page to download a document at pacer.gov (by the way, the magistrate still has not issued a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants and forcing SC to refile their lawsuits as individual actions)
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:28 am |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
Yes, thank you chips, this saved me the effort to copy and paste it!
|
|
Top |
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 11:52 am |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am Posts: 691 Location: Carson City, NV Been Liked: 0 time
|
Thunder wrote: Yes, thank you chips, this saved me the effort to copy and paste it! I too prefer being able to read it now in pdf instead of the tiny print!
_________________ "Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:06 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
c. staley wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: c. staley wrote: As always, thanks for the link, Chip. Printed and saved. I'm not in the business of law. Is this site open to public subscription? yes it is. It costs 8 cents per page to download a document at pacer.gov (by the way, the magistrate still has not issued a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants and forcing SC to refile their lawsuits as individual actions) Funny, I could only find one defendant on the SC v Nigel suit, why would the magistrate need to issue a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants?
|
|
Top |
|
|
Bazza
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:07 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 8:00 am Posts: 3312 Images: 0 Been Liked: 610 times
|
c. staley wrote: yes it is. It costs 8 cents per page to download a document at pacer.gov They actually changed the fee structure last year. If you use less than $10 a month, the fees are waived so unless you are downloading a LOT of data, it costs you nothing.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:09 pm |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am Posts: 691 Location: Carson City, NV Been Liked: 0 time
|
Thunder wrote: c. staley wrote: (by the way, the magistrate still has not issued a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants and forcing SC to refile their lawsuits as individual actions)
Funny, I could only find one defendant on the SC v Nigel suit, why would the magistrate need to issue a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants? He's referring to the original filing from 2009. Refer to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=21622
_________________ "Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"
|
|
Top |
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:10 pm |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am Posts: 691 Location: Carson City, NV Been Liked: 0 time
|
Bazza wrote: c. staley wrote: yes it is. It costs 8 cents per page to download a document at pacer.gov They actually changed the fee structure last year. If you use less than $10 a month, the fees are waived so unless you are downloading a LOT of data, it costs you nothing. Oh, I'll bet he's downloading a ton of data!
_________________ "Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:44 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
Wall Of Sound wrote: Thunder wrote: c. staley wrote: (by the way, the magistrate still has not issued a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants and forcing SC to refile their lawsuits as individual actions)
Funny, I could only find one defendant on the SC v Nigel suit, why would the magistrate need to issue a determination/opinion/order regarding the multiple defendants? He's referring to the original filing from 2009. Refer to this thread: http://karaokescene.com/forums/viewtopi ... 26&t=21622So are you saying he is just cutting cheese? The lawsuit refered to in that case is totally different, totally different filling in a totally different state.
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:04 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
Thunder wrote: So are you saying he is just cutting cheese?
The lawsuit refered to in that case is totally different, totally different filling in a totally different state. It is a different case that I'm monitoring.... If SC is ruled against by the magistrate, it will mean that 26 or so defendants will be dismissed immediately and SC will then be required to file 26 or so separate lawsuits. This will change the filing fee from $350.00 to $9,100.00 (the way it should be in my opinion) I forgot you were gone for a few weeks when this came up..... try catching up.... And yes, I have an account because I use it for much more than tracking karaoke squabbles....
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:13 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
Wall Of Sound wrote: He's referring to the original filing from 2009. Refer to this thread: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=21622The filing is from 2011... (Feb. 9th, 2011) that's probably where you thought it was 2009 when it was 02-09-11
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:11 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
I am hoping that Sound Choice and Chartbuster will both start filing against all pirates in single suits and start asking for the maximum in damages. If they do it will greatly increase the cost per defendant as their will be no shared attorneys fees and the judges or juries won't be looking at the over all amounts awarded (from several defendants) to the manus and thinking it is just too much of a wind fall.
I look at it this way, if SC sues 25 defendants and seeks $20,000 in damages from each the juries or judges will see $625,000 as a very large sum! The defendants can lower their cost by hiring one attorney to defend all 25 and for sanctions and attorney's fees due Sound Choice the judge may look at it as one case instead of 25 and thus reduce SC's recovery of attorney's fees to "one case". On the other hand an award of $50,000 for infringement plus attorney's fees by one defendant doesn't look like that great of an amount, but will actually hit the pirate a lot harder.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Cueball
|
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:55 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2001 6:55 pm Posts: 4433 Location: New York City Been Liked: 757 times
|
Thunder wrote: I look at it this way, if SC sues 25 defendants and seeks $20,000 in damages from each the juries or judges will see $625,000 as a very large sum! The defendants can lower their cost by hiring one attorney to defend all 25 and for sanctions and attorney's fees due Sound Choice the judge may look at it as one case instead of 25 and thus reduce SC's recovery of attorney's fees to "one case". On the other hand an award of $50,000 for infringement plus attorney's fees by one defendant doesn't look like that great of an amount, but will actually hit the pirate a lot harder. Here goes a question that I know has been stated before (somewhere (probably more than once)).... Once a judgement has been made against said Pirate, what's to stop that person from filing Bankruptcy, thus not paying out a dime to the Manufacturers who sued him/her/them? I can see what would be set up to stop that Pirate from continuing to operate under a new (business) name because the Manufacturers are also suing the Venues for hiring them in the first place.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:08 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
Quote: Some Debts Are Never Discharged
Exceptions to discharge primarily relate to prior bad acts. The law seeks to prevent anyone to discharge debts and profit from harming another or neglecting high priority obligations. These exceptions include the types of debts appearing immediately below.
1.Back taxes, accrued interest, government fines, penalties and punitive debts assessed by government authorities. 2.Any debt that was not eliminated in a prior bankruptcy case filed under chapter 7. 3.Debts resulting from credit card withdrawals for $750 or more, if the withdrawal occurred within 70 days of filing. 4.Debts for purchases of luxury goods or luxury services for $500 or more, if the debt occurred during 90 days before filing. 5.Debts created by accounts, credit cards, unsecured loans or installment credit if accepted during the 60 days before filing. 6.Liability resulting from the commission of a crime, including fraud, theft, larceny, embezzlement, robbery. This ban applies at the time of discharge and is covers all debts incurred at any time without limitation, including all court ordered restitution. 7.Debts for damages and personal injuries caused while a debtor drove under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances. 8.Any debts assigned to a governmental authority for collection. 9.Liability for malicious injuries, including assault, battery and vandalism. 10.Other fines for violations of law, including all criminal fines and traffic tickets. 11.All debts credit created fraud, deception, concealment or intentional false pretenses. It is going to be a little harder to discharge a debt from a judgement specifically because of that judgement. If the Manu can show that the pirate was operating in the black before a judgement was rendered a bankruptcy court is generally not going to consider the judgement itself cause to grant bankruptcy. And add to this even if the bankruptcy filing were granted the pirate would still be out of the karaoke business because the court would order the sale of all of his gear and he would have to deal with another suit for the same violations if he started up again (this one not protected by bankruptcy law)
Last edited by Thunder on Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:25 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
Also consider that $50,000 or $60,000 is not really all that much money.
My wife's cancer surgery and treatments were over $60,000 and we had that paid off in 5 years (no insurance), so filing bankruptcy to get out of paying that amount of money would be foolish.
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:02 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
Thunder wrote: Also consider that $50,000 or $60,000 is not really all that much money.
My wife's cancer surgery and treatments were over $60,000 and we had that paid off in 5 years (no insurance), so filing bankruptcy to get out of paying that amount of money would be foolish. If it "is not really all that much money" then please mail me a mere 10%.... I promise to say nice things about you.
|
|
Top |
|
|
diafel
|
Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:32 am |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:27 am Posts: 2444 Been Liked: 46 times
|
Thunder wrote: Quote: Some Debts Are Never Discharged
Exceptions to discharge primarily relate to prior bad acts. The law seeks to prevent anyone to discharge debts and profit from harming another or neglecting high priority obligations. These exceptions include the types of debts appearing immediately below.
1.Back taxes, accrued interest, government fines, penalties and punitive debts assessed by government authorities. 2.Any debt that was not eliminated in a prior bankruptcy case filed under chapter 7. 3.Debts resulting from credit card withdrawals for $750 or more, if the withdrawal occurred within 70 days of filing. 4.Debts for purchases of luxury goods or luxury services for $500 or more, if the debt occurred during 90 days before filing. 5.Debts created by accounts, credit cards, unsecured loans or installment credit if accepted during the 60 days before filing. 6.Liability resulting from the commission of a crime, including fraud, theft, larceny, embezzlement, robbery. This ban applies at the time of discharge and is covers all debts incurred at any time without limitation, including all court ordered restitution. 7.Debts for damages and personal injuries caused while a debtor drove under the influence of alcohol or controlled substances. 8.Any debts assigned to a governmental authority for collection. 9.Liability for malicious injuries, including assault, battery and vandalism. 10.Other fines for violations of law, including all criminal fines and traffic tickets. 11.All debts credit created fraud, deception, concealment or intentional false pretenses. It is going to be a little harder to discharge a debt from a judgement specifically because of that judgement. If the Manu can show that the pirate was operating in the black before a judgement was rendered a bankruptcy court is generally not going to consider the judgement itself cause to grant bankruptcy. And add to this even if the bankruptcy filing were granted the pirate would still be out of the karaoke business because the court would order the sale of all of his gear and he would have to deal with another suit for the same violations if he started up again (this one not protected by bankruptcy law) I would think that in order to fulfill #6, the first one you've bolded, that charges against said pirate would have to be laid and seen through to a guilty verdict in CRIMINAL court. The same holds true for #11. #1, however, might hold a little more water in this circumstance: Quote: 1.Back taxes, accrued interest, government fines, penalties and punitive debts assessed by government authorities.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 6:18 am |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
Queball,
Research OJ simpson! he tried to file bankruptcy to get out of paying the judgement against him by Nicole's and Ron's families, the judgement stood.
|
|
Top |
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 8:57 am |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm Posts: 4094 Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada Been Liked: 309 times
|
That's because OJ is a person, not a corporation. If a KJ is incorporated and the company goes bankrupt, that's it. However, if one is smart one sues both the corporation and the person.
_________________ You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
Top |
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:37 am |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am Posts: 1066 Location: Madison VA Been Liked: 0 time
|
Tim actually the assets (rights to the book "If I Did It") he was trying to hide where through a corporation which also bankrucptied at the same time he did personally, the bankruptcy court ruled that the corporation was a sham corporation.
Just as any corporation created within three years of a damage case being filed would be found to be. And for the most part where it is known the manus are filing against the corporation and the owners of said corporations and under whatever names or aliases they are going by.
Add to that fact Nigel is not operating as a corporation in either Virginia or North Carolina. Most of the pirate KJs are not operating as corporations most aren't even paying taxes on the money they are stealing.
BTW what year was the last Richmond Virginia Jolt summit?
|
|
Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 281 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|