Rossi vs. Darden developments [CASE CLOSED]

Quote from sifferkoll

"The road to hell is paved by good intentions", as they say...

So ironic, coming from you. Given the quality of your comments, I'll except your judgement as a compliment and badge of honor.

Thanks for that.

BTW, the 'squirming' I was referring to is regarding the assessment by your (current) followers regarding your Rossi cheerleading and smear campaign tactics to those who don't hold your views. Not merely the facts and conclusions of the US trial. I'm inclined to believe that this information may affect their thoughts about your ethics.

Quote from JedRothwell

 

If he loses this trial, he doesn't have to pay back anything. He is the plaintiff. If he loses the counter-suit he will have to pay back some money.

I believe that's how it works.

 

The counter-suit is part of the proceedings. In other words, the jury in this case will have to decide both the main suit and the counter-suit.

Basically, the test is whether a particular claim involves all the same parties and arises out of the same set of facts. If it does, you have to litigate it now or forever hold your peace. It's done that way both to save time and to reduce the possibility of conflicting judgments in a single case.

Quote from MikeDunford

The counter-suit is part of the proceedings. In other words, the jury in this case will have to decide both the main suit and the counter-suit.

Is that how it works? Are you sure? I wouldn't know, but I think a lawyer said the counter-suit would call for another trial.

If they can do them both at the same time that reduces expenses and saves time.

Quote from [email protected]

Good. If they have been allowed as evidence then other JONP Rossisays items should be allowed as well. If I were the judge I'd be focusing on the Rossisays "I would refund IH if I got my IP back" and this whole trial could get wrapped up in 20 minutes rather than 5 weeks.

Settlement discussions are often not admissible at trial. But let's say Rossi gets in, what then when IH says fine - bring a cashier's check for the $11.5 million. Does Rossi have the cash or will that be another instance of Rossi coming up with an excuse? And, if Rossi and IH settled mid-trial on those terms, Rossi could arguable be worse off. With the trial, he stands some chance, however small, of winning on both the principal complaint and the counter-claim. If he settles and then doesn't pay, IH has a slam-dunk case against him for the $11.5 million. What would his defense to non-payment of that be - I didn't mean it or didn't understand it? And given that such a settlement gives IH everything they want originally, I suspect they would have accepted a genuine offer. Remember, if they win on the counter-claim, they will likely be deemed to have rescinded any claims they have to the IP (once they are fully paid). Based on the above, I don't find the alleged settlement offer credible. To plagiarize, "show me the money."

Quote from sifferkoll

???? I though it suited your attitude nicely. You were the one saying that your good intentions kept your back clean (and sleeping well) regardless consequences of your actions. I never said so, because I do not believe it to be true.

Except of course, I didn't say that at all.

But it certainly is consistent of you to put words into my mouth , just like you have done for many others who don't hold your views.

So at least you get points for consistency, even if you take a hit on 'ethics' by doing so.

Quote from JedRothwell

Is that how it works? Are you sure? I wouldn't know, but I think a lawyer said the counter-suit would call for another trial.

If they can do them both at the same time that reduces expenses and saves time.

Quote from JedRothwell

Is that how it works? Are you sure? I wouldn't know, but I think a lawyer said the counter-suit would call for another trial.

If they can do them both at the same time that reduces expenses and saves time.

Mike is correct. Generally (with some exceptions that don't apply here), if the causes of action arise from the same set of facts and are related, you must file a counter-claim, not a separate complaint.

Thanks Shane D - you're one smart mofo. The ethics of Planet Rossi are all relative in a good and evil kind of way and are dependent on the needs of the daily narrative. As you infer, that also includes who you share your top secret secrets with.

We'll be hearing about all of that in the not too distant future. Yet another gauntlet too far for the R'miester.

Quote from [email protected]

 

Good. If they have been allowed as evidence then other JONP Rossisays items should be allowed as well. If I were the judge I'd be focusing on the Rossisays "I would refund IH if I got my IP back" and this whole trial could get wrapped up in 20 minutes rather than 5 weeks.

 

Ummmmm -

One, it's a jury trial, not a bench trial. That's a peculiarity of the American legal system, and not one that makes a huge amount of sense particularly in highly technical cases, but it would take an amendment to the Constitution to change it, so it's here to stay. So the judge doesn't really have to focus on anything.

Two, technically nothing has been allowed in as evidence yet. Given the right circumstances, they may be allowed. But, again, not everything that is admissible will necessarily get used. There's a very good chance that the ones that are listed will make it there, but they might not. The right question might not get asked, there may be authentication issues, any number of things could happen.

Many, admissibility of evidence is always decided based on the exact evidence being offered, not the source. So just because one thing from the site is offered does not automatically mean everything from the site will be admitted.

Lots, just because you think that something should be put in front of the judge doesn't mean the lawyers will agree. If I was IH's lawyers, I don't think I'd want to put anything suggesting that Rossi offered to refund out there - particularly if it wasn't a formal offer. It would do little to help with the defense of the breach claim, and could actually end up hurting depending on how (and how effectively) it's spun by the plaintiffs. And it would definitely not help them with the counter-claim, because they'd end up looking like they want to keep the IP and the money. And while the posts might be admissible if offered by IH, that does not mean that they'd be admissible if Rossi offers them. Under the rules of evidence, statements made out of court by the other side generally aren't hearsay. But your own out of court statements can be and often are. And that assumes that Rossi's attorneys would want to offer the blog stuff in the first place, which is questionable.

Mike Dunford - Rossi is going to get many opportunities to commit further perjury.

Quote from JedRothwell

 

Is that how it works? Are you sure? I wouldn't know, but I think a lawyer said the counter-suit would call for another trial.

If they can do them both at the same time that reduces expenses and saves time.

 

Positive. It's basic civil procedure.

And, if you want to check my work, take a careful look at the order denying summary judgment. The cover sheet has the full breakdown of the parties, and lists IH both as the defendant and counter-plaintiff; Rossi is the plaintiff and counter-defendant. (And there's the third-party stuff, but that's more than we need to go into here.)

Quote from oldguy

 

notice in the original opening they made the claim that Rossi was nominated for a Nobel prize. I sure would like to see the evidence for that.

 

My recollection is that basically anyone can nominate anyone for a Nobel. So there's probably some evidence for that, but it's easily explained as the meaningless thing that it is.

Quote from woodworker

Mike is correct. Generally (with some exceptions that don't apply here), if the causes of action arise from the same set of facts and are related, you must file a counter-claim, not a separate complaint.

So, the jury has to decide the whole kit-and-caboodle? It can award Rossi what he wants, or I.H. what they want, or nothing either way. I guess that will take 5 weeks. It is a tangled mess.

I hope I.H. wins, or at least, that they do not lose.

Quote from MikeDunford

My recollection is that basically anyone can nominate anyone for a Nobel. So there's probably some evidence for that, but it's easily explained as the meaningless thing that it is.

IIRC, nominations are publicly disclosed for some significant time, if at all. Only winners.

Also, on another issue: does anyone immediately recall what lawyer told IH that Rossi had no involvement in the fake company (a/k/a JM). That lawyer may have issues with his state bar.