[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Blowhard Bradley Kuhn and his fraud

From: RJack
Subject: Re: Blowhard Bradley Kuhn and his fraud
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:58:26 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7

On 1/4/2011 6:34 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

"Plaintiffs' motion to join respondents is denied as to CMA.
Plaintiffs' motion to join WD is denied, without prejudice subject
to Plaintiff's decision to refile following an evidentiary hearing
on the issues of whether the asset sale amounted to merger between
WDE and WD and whether WD substantially continued WDE's business. A
hearing is scheduled for February 2, 2010 at 4:30 P.M. The Clerk of
the Court is directed to close this motion (Docket No. 133)."

You can bet this is what the appeal is ultimately about:

"17 USC ยง 505. Remedies for infringement: Costs and attorney's fees.
In any civil action under this title, the court in its discretion may
allow the recovery of full costs by or against any party other than the
United States or an officer thereof. Except as otherwise provided by
this title, the court may also award a reasonable attorney's fee to the
prevailing party as part of the costs."

SFLC should never have attempted to drag CMA into this action. CMA was
adamant that they would attempt to recover attorney fees and costs. The
District court's dismissal of CMA as a defendant left both SFC and Erik
Andersen liable for CMA's attorney fees. Now, SFLC is going to add CMA's
appellate fees to the costs of litigation. Bad, bad move. Appellate
practice is very expensive.

I predicted Erik Andersen's bankruptcy from this litigation. With four
of six defendants still heading to jury trial, the litigation costs will
be in the seven figures range. Ouch.

RJack :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]