<< <i>LOL I know Paul Elwell. Hope you nail him down hard, though I think it's not a definite win. You definitely have a lot of work ahead of you. You gotta prove not only that he hurt you economically, but that there's a specific dollar amount he cost you.
Speaking of "specific numbers," let's hope he doesn't bring up the extra $3-4 million you spent bidding on that 1794 dollar, no? Might throw away the "economic cost" credibility >>
/eyeroll. So - you are calling Cardinal a liar when he says there were 4 underbidders in the room and one was prepared to go just under our nuclear bid?
<< <i>Speaking of "specific numbers," let's hope he doesn't bring up the extra $3-4 million you spent bidding on that 1794 dollar, no? Might throw away the "economic cost" credibility >>
With the understanding that I'm not a lawyer, I would find it difficult to believe that the amount of any judgement one might win in a lawsuit would be based on how easily one could afford the loss they suffered.
<< <i>LOL I know Paul Elwell. Hope you nail him down hard, though I think it's not a definite win. You definitely have a lot of work ahead of you. You gotta prove not only that he hurt you economically, but that there's a specific dollar amount he cost you.
Speaking of "specific numbers," let's hope he doesn't bring up the extra $3-4 million you spent bidding on that 1794 dollar, no? Might throw away the "economic cost" credibility >>
/eyeroll. So - you are calling Cardinal a liar when he says there were 4 underbidders in the room and one was prepared to go just under our nuclear bid? >>
/eyeroll. Jeezus TDN I'm just pulling your leg! Normally I'd call this lawsuit "frivolous" because plenty of successful people will ignore one lousy review (esp with the bombastic wording and the fact that it was on that "ripoff site") but this guy tried impersonating someone else (Laura) and that's why I wanna see him given the shaft
Couple of technical questions from a fellow attorney:
--The NJ federal court dockets show Sperber has actually filed two lawsuits. She filed her first lawsuit on Feb. 1 (the -691 case) and filed her second, totally separate lawsuit on Feb. 6th (the -768 case). She filed a notice of dismissal of the original -691 case on Feb. 6, and the case was closed the following day, Feb. 7.
There's an attorney certification, signed Feb. 6, attached to Sperber's second lawsuit, saying "I hereby certify that, to my knowledge, the matter in controversy in this action is not the subject of any other pending lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding." Is that accurate? Was the original lawsuit still "pending" on the 6th? I don't know the local rules well in NJ so perhaps another attorney can enlighten me. It's a technical point, but you want to cross all your "t"s and dot all your "i"s if you're filing this kind of lawsuit.
--Also, what's the reason for filing a lawsuit, then dismissing it entirely a week later? Why not just file an amended complaint? It's quite unusual, in my experience, to see this.
--I don't see any facts or allegations linking the defendant to New Jersey. Has he ever been to NJ? Done much business there? Just on the face of the complaint, how does a New Jersey federal court have personal jurisdiction over the defendant? This may be the bigger problem. You can obviously sue the guy in Michigan, but establishing personal jurisdiction in a NJ court may be difficult.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
These look like good questions, but I would not the expect the plaintiff to pay their attorney $500/hr to come on here and explain their legal strategy
$500 an hour may be the rate for the associate. The partner presumably charges more.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
<< <i>Couple of technical questions from a fellow attorney:
--The NJ federal court dockets show Sperber has actually filed two lawsuits. She filed her first lawsuit on Feb. 1 (the -691 case) and filed her second, totally separate lawsuit on Feb. 6th (the -768 case). She filed a notice of dismissal of the original -691 case on Feb. 6, and the case was closed the following day, Feb. 7.
There's an attorney certification, signed Feb. 6, attached to Sperber's second lawsuit, saying "I hereby certify that, to my knowledge, the matter in controversy in this action is not the subject of any other pending lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding." Is that accurate? Was the original lawsuit still "pending" on the 6th? I don't know the local rules well in NJ so perhaps another attorney can enlighten me. It's a technical point, but you want to cross all your "t"s and dot all your "i"s if you're filing this kind of lawsuit.
--Also, what's the reason for filing a lawsuit, then dismissing it entirely a week later? Why not just file an amended complaint? It's quite unusual, in my experience, to see this.
--I don't see any facts or allegations linking the defendant to New Jersey. Has he ever been to NJ? Done much business there? Just on the face of the complaint, how does a New Jersey federal court have personal jurisdiction over the defendant? This may be the bigger problem. You can obviously sue the guy in Michigan, but establishing personal jurisdiction in a NJ court may be difficult. >>
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
You're welcome. Allow me to interpret - that was layman for.... WTF???
I mean - seriously - who is going to be able to answer your questions? The only one capable is our attorney and he doesn't post here. Even if he did, he wouldn't. So what kind of response did you expect other than HUH?
<< <i>I searched my PM history and Paul Elwell was board member "ProofCents". I had a couple dealings with him in 2010.
-Paul >>
I remember him. Took me like six months to get paid via a transaction on the BST forums here (not a cheap coin either, at least, for me) after sending him the coin first, based on his "good name". Vowed never to deal with him again.
I hope this works out to the full satisfaction of anyone damaged or harmed in any way. Reputations are important at any level of play. "Man lives by his rep." - West Indian Archie
You're welcome. Allow me to interpret - that was layman for.... WTF???
I mean - seriously - who is going to be able to answer your questions? The only one capable is our attorney and he doesn't post here. Even if he did, he wouldn't. So what kind of response did you expect other than HUH? >>
I'm guessing the kind of response he's expecting is where folks gush over how smart of a legal mind he has, and how folks will trip over themselves wanting his talents for all sorts of other matters.
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
I'm guessing the kind of response he's expecting is where folks gush over how smart of a legal mind he has, and how folks will trip over themselves wanting his talents for all sorts of other matters.
EVP >>
Yep, EVP, you found me out. People ask me all the time -- how did you graduate a top 10 law school and make partner at one of the 10 biggest law firms in US ? -- and my answer is always the same. US Coin forums, baby.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy. >>
Subject matter and personal jurisdiction are, while at times complicated, issues that any attorney would certainly look into before filing a lawsuit. This is civil procedure 101 stuff that I'm sure a well respected attorney would not miss. I don't know the attorneys involved, but I'm guessing that the Plaintiff isn't hiring second rate counsel that would gaff such a basic issue.
Personal jurisdiction as applied in the real world can be very complicated. It's not a screw-up if the case gets dismissed for lack of PJ, and they've certainly hired a well-known firm. But usually in a complaint I would expect to see more specific allegations of PJ.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy. >>
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest.
I'm guessing the kind of response he's expecting is where folks gush over how smart of a legal mind he has, and how folks will trip over themselves wanting his talents for all sorts of other matters.
EVP >>
Yep, EVP, you found me out. People ask me all the time -- how did you graduate a top 10 law school and make partner at one of the 10 biggest law firms in US ? -- and my answer is always the same. US Coin forums, baby. >>
/eyeroll
You come on here and get all lawyer-like in this place. When we point out that this is a coin forum, you persist in pushing your lawyer-like acumen. I guess they don't teach common sense in your law school. Personally, I don't believe you are a top-notch lawyer, don't believe you graduated from a top-10 law school and don't believe you're a partner at one of the 10 biggest law firms in the US. All I see is you want to prove how good of a lawyer you are to a bunch of coin weenies. Nice move. Sharp. Smart. You win - you're a much better lawyer than I am. Happy?
Since you're a lawyer, you must know some Latin. How do you say "horse's patootie" in Latin? Is it something like "writ of habeas patootie"? Or is it "cogito ergo patootie"?
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy. >>
While this is true, I am certain that Dale Kinsella took everything into account when he chose where to file
<< <i> Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest. >>
Very interesting question. I think the "injury", as it allegedly occurred in NJ and other places, probably gives the court in NJ what's called "subject matter jurisdiction." But you still need the "personal jurisdiction" piece, and if it's just a guy sitting in his basement in Michigan posting stuff online, I don't know that that creates enough contacts with NJ to do the trick. There's probably case law on it, but it would take someone to research it. Presumably the attys who filed the lawsuit believe they have enough; but my only comment is that usually I'd want to see more in the complaint establishing the guy's contacts with NJ.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
<< <i> Since you're a lawyer, you must know some Latin. How do you say "horse's patootie" in Latin? >>
In Latin, it's an acronym. E-V-P.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy. >>
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest. >>
There are many jurisdictional issues to consider in an internet based injury claim. I assume the plaintiff's lawyers considered them before filing. However, if Legend is in NJ and filed there, I'm assuming that the simplest analysis was to file where you live and where you were injured and make others come to your home. But that is just an assumption. I should add that this is a federal question jurisdiction case so jurisdiction would be in federal court and your question is more of a proper venue question, or where is the best place to try the case. But the analysis is the same. Also, defamation is a state law claim, so I need to pull the complaint to see what is up here. There are undoubtedly multiple counts, including at least one federal question count, which would require a federal court to take jurisdiction and which would allow the federal court to assume jurisdiction over the pendant state law claims. But I need to see the complaint to say more.
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy. >>
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest. >>
There are many jurisdictional issues to consider in an internet based injury claim. I assume the plaintiff's lawyers considered them before filing. However, if Legend is in NJ and filed there, I'm assuming that the simplest analysis was to file where you live and where you were injured and make others come to your home. But that is just an assumption. I should add that this is a federal question jurisdiction case so jurisdiction would be in federal court and your question is more of a proper venue question, or where is the best place to try the case. But the analysis is the same. Also, defamation is a state law claim, so I need to pull the complaint to see what is up here. There are undoubtedly multiple counts, including at least one federal question count, which would require a federal court to take jurisdiction and which would allow the federal court to assume jurisdiction over the pendant state law claims. But I need to see the complaint to say more. >>
+ 1 The federal courts really do not like accepting cases that traditionally belong in state courts (i.e. defamation suits) so it will be interesting to see just what hook is being used here to keep this one out of state court.
What does Ms. Sperber want to see happen? I don't know the defendant's financial situation, but collection of judgments is often much more difficult than obtaining them. If the Defendant responds and this case goes forward to a trial it will take alot of time, alot of $, and Ms. Sperber will go through much strain and disclosure along the way. She's claiming damage, and showing it, for some folks, is more invasive than a false post. Litigation is no fun (except for the attorneys).
Financially this makes no sense. Economy damages are tough to prove, especially with the frequent releases with big numbers and painting a rosy picture. Non-economy damages are speculative, and difficult to collect if awared. Is there anyone that is know that didn't transact business with her as a result of the false posts? And that is making a very large assumption that she wins.
This will, no question, cause the Defendant's life to suck. I again assume that the evidence is overwhelming that the Defendant is the person that typed and hit enter to post the comments. If it wasn't him she is dealing with entirely different problems.
This whole litigation is dragging up something that seemed to be forgotten. Is the vindication of a court order, which few will see, and making his life suck, worth the hassle?
I'm sure that there were many long and well thought out conversations with the attorneys about the consequences of this case. I'm just curious what an ideal outcome would be? - Thanks
I have no idea how you got your info (or how good it is), but I feel it is a bad idea to mention someones name and town on an internet website owned by a publically traded company (it may be even against a posty rule).
If FBI, PIs, and computer hacker dream team was used in your investigation, the info maybe good. There should be ongoing criminal investigations and criminal charges following this civil suit.
If my source was from info subpoenaed from an extortionist web site, I would worry about validity. I also would be concerned about if my computer security skills were better than theirs. I could see nothing worse than making false accusations against someone whose info was found by hacking my own website....
Usually congratulations and accolades come after conviction.
YOU ARE CORRECT, YET WE WILL DO THIS EVERY TIME WE NEED TO DO SO
This will, no question, cause the Defendant's life to suck.
YOU ARE CORRECT, BUT HE BROUGHT IT UPON HIMSELF
This whole litigation is dragging up something that seemed to be forgotten. Is the vindication of a court order, which few will see, and making his life suck, worth the hassle?
FORGOTTEN? THAT IS SILLY. MAYBE ON THIS CHATROOM - YET IT IS STILL OUT THERE FOR THE WORLD TO SEE.
I'm sure that there were many long and well thought out conversations with the attorneys about the consequences of this case. I'm just curious what an ideal outcome would be? - Thanks
NO ONE EVER EVER POSTING CRAP LIKE THAT AGAIN WOULD BE A GOOD START
Is this case big enough to go mainstream media, if Legend is successful in court? I think there is public empathy out there surrounding the idea of people hiding behind the Internet and saying whatever they want without impunity. IIRC, there have been couple Facebook cases where folks were legally penalized for slander.
Lawsuits are filed on a daily basis throughout the country in the state and federal court systems. The motives of those who file lawsuits and the motives of those who defend lawsuits which cause them to prosecute and to defend are varied, but one of the motives can be "The principle of the thing".
Sometimes the bad conduct of another should not be allowed to go unpunished (even if all you get out of the lawsuit is a judgment that says you were right and the defendant was wrong). This is particularly true in cases where one's reputation is wrongfully tarnished/trashed by false statements. If one's reputation is the thing that is most important to your continued success in your chosen field, then the time and expense of a lawsuit that can give you vindication in the form of a judgment determining that the defendant was wrong may be well worth it.
By analogy what this case seems to involve is a bully who has picked on someone who has decided to fight back.
I remember in middle school a situation where an 8th grade bully decided to pick on a 7th grade classmate of mine. The outcome of the preliminary hallway skirmish was a challenge by the 8th grader for the 7th grader to "meet him on the playground after school to fight". Well it just so happened that the 7th grade classmate of mine was, though a small asian kid who wore glasses, tough as nails and not afraid to stand up for himself. Word spread throughout the school of the "challenge" and thus a large crowd showed up on the playground after school to see what would happen. Turned out that the 8th grade bully throughout the day began to realize that he may have picked on the wrong 7th grader. In the end the 7th grader showed up and the 8th grade bully never showed up.
The following day the 7th grader was the object of praise from the other students in the school while the 8th grader was the recipient of derision, including other students clucking like a chicken whenever he walked by
It's my understanding that Laura's photograph is copyrighted - and I don't know if her name and/or her company's name is trademarked - but since Paul used her photo without permission in the ripoff report, that would account for the copyright infringement claim which must be adjudicated in federal court.
<< <i>It's my understanding that Laura's photograph is trademarked - and I don't know if her name and/or her company's name is trademarked - but since Paul used her photo without permission in the ripoff report. that would account for the copy right infringement claim which must be adjudicated in federal court. >>
Interesting. I loathe the extortion business model of Ripoff Report, and I really support a lot of things Laura is advocating.
I was able to find this as well. It mentions the use of the photo. Also, it seems that the "Laura Sperber" on ripoff report was not actually her, but someone impersonating her, and THAT impersonation is the crux of the lawsuit. I'm not a lawyer, though, so take my interpretation with a grain of salt.
Preventing this from happening again is a worthy goal.
The report is still on the Internet, high ranking for Internet searches and the subject matter relates to Legend's business. Before initiating a new business relationship, many people check for online cumsumer reports so it is likely this would appear. Perhaps estimated damages can be related to search ranking, e.g. first Google search result, first Google result page, etc. Perhaps the issue would also be less serious if the alleged cyber-bully removed his posts. Has he done that?
It is amusing to me that there are forum members who expect the litigation strategy and desired remedies to be discussed and revealed in a public chat room.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Congratulations on finding the perpetrator. Paul Elwell is now banned to buy/sell/trade with me. I think he collects Matte Proof Lincolns.
This "Ripoff report" web site model is troubling. They are for-profit and allow anyone to post without proof. Then they charge you to clear your name. Sounds like an on-line protection racket.
<< <i>Congratulations on finding the perpetrator. Paul Elwell is now banned to buy/sell/trade with me. I think he collects Matte Proof Lincolns.
This "Ripoff report" web site model is troubling. They are for-profit and allow anyone to post without proof. Then they charge you to clear your name. Sounds like an on-line protection racket. >>
This is an ongoing problem for many companies dealing with on-line reviews. The hosting companies do not require any proof, or only minimal proof, and then they defend themselves on the basis that they are only "hosting" companies. Lawsuits against the hosting companies are usually unsuccessful, but the trend appears to be changing a little bit. I represent a number of companies, including at least one coin company that deals with this and it is frustrating.
Typically, when a false or defamatory report is issued, you must obtain information on the poster from the hosting company, which in and of itself can be frustrating, and then you must pursue the individual wrongdoer. The interesting thing about the Sperber case, from my viewpoint, is that she has sued the hosting company, it appears, in Arizona, for copyright infringement, which is a bit of a new twist for me.
Charmy is right. The photograph is the subject of the copyright claims. The lawsuit states causes of action for (1) copyright infringement; (2) False advertising and false designation ( primarily about the replies to the intial post allegedly falsely claiming to be Laura); (3) Libel - for both the initial posting and the replies in Laura's name.
Paul Elwell is the only currently named defendant but the complaint does list Does 1-10 and states that they were responsible in some manner for the acts and transactions alleged in the complaint.
The Complaint is filed in federal court on the basis of federal question (federal law) jurisdiction and diversity of citizenship jurisdiction too.
I do not know why it was filed, dismissed and re-filed as from my first quick reading the new complaint appears to be identical to the original one.
Factual personal jurisdiction allegations are not set out in any detail, but presumably the claim is that the internet defamation was published in New Jersey as well as other states, giving minimum contacts with New Jersey. I have not done any research to see if an internet publication constitutes minimum contacts so that the defendant can expect to be sued in any state that publication reaches.
This will be an interesting case to follow. I am glad someone can stand up to this kind of anonymous behavior. However, principle is expensive to litigate. Hope the alleged wrongdoer has some financial ability.
We had one awhile back where the alleged bad behavior (Libel) occurred via email and our client (from Tennessee) was sued here in Mich. I didn't handle the research but one of the other guys said it's where the alleged damage took place which was here in Mich, which seems to fit with the complaint filed in this case.
Comments
<< <i>LOL I know Paul Elwell. Hope you nail him down hard, though I think it's not a definite win. You definitely have a lot of work ahead of you. You gotta prove not only that he hurt you economically, but that there's a specific dollar amount he cost you.
Speaking of "specific numbers," let's hope he doesn't bring up the extra $3-4 million you spent bidding on that 1794 dollar, no? Might throw away the "economic cost" credibility
/eyeroll. So - you are calling Cardinal a liar when he says there were 4 underbidders in the room and one was prepared to go just under our nuclear bid?
<< <i>Speaking of "specific numbers," let's hope he doesn't bring up the extra $3-4 million you spent bidding on that 1794 dollar, no? Might throw away the "economic cost" credibility
With the understanding that I'm not a lawyer, I would find it difficult to believe that the amount of any judgement one might win in a lawsuit would be based on how easily one could afford the loss they suffered.
But I would bet someone will post it here soon.
Good luck Laura. We wish you success.
<< <i>
<< <i>LOL I know Paul Elwell. Hope you nail him down hard, though I think it's not a definite win. You definitely have a lot of work ahead of you. You gotta prove not only that he hurt you economically, but that there's a specific dollar amount he cost you.
Speaking of "specific numbers," let's hope he doesn't bring up the extra $3-4 million you spent bidding on that 1794 dollar, no? Might throw away the "economic cost" credibility
/eyeroll. So - you are calling Cardinal a liar when he says there were 4 underbidders in the room and one was prepared to go just under our nuclear bid?
/eyeroll. Jeezus TDN I'm just pulling your leg! Normally I'd call this lawsuit "frivolous" because plenty of successful people will ignore one lousy review (esp with the bombastic wording and the fact that it was on that "ripoff site") but this guy tried impersonating someone else (Laura) and that's why I wanna see him given the shaft
Dolan
--The NJ federal court dockets show Sperber has actually filed two lawsuits. She filed her first lawsuit on Feb. 1 (the -691 case) and filed her second, totally separate lawsuit on Feb. 6th (the -768 case). She filed a notice of dismissal of the original -691 case on Feb. 6, and the case was closed the following day, Feb. 7.
There's an attorney certification, signed Feb. 6, attached to Sperber's second lawsuit, saying "I hereby certify that, to my knowledge, the matter in controversy in this action is not the subject of any other pending lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding." Is that accurate? Was the original lawsuit still "pending" on the 6th? I don't know the local rules well in NJ so perhaps another attorney can enlighten me. It's a technical point, but you want to cross all your "t"s and dot all your "i"s if you're filing this kind of lawsuit.
--Also, what's the reason for filing a lawsuit, then dismissing it entirely a week later? Why not just file an amended complaint? It's quite unusual, in my experience, to see this.
--I don't see any facts or allegations linking the defendant to New Jersey. Has he ever been to NJ? Done much business there? Just on the face of the complaint, how does a New Jersey federal court have personal jurisdiction over the defendant? This may be the bigger problem. You can obviously sue the guy in Michigan, but establishing personal jurisdiction in a NJ court may be difficult.
-Paul
<< <i>Couple of technical questions from a fellow attorney:
--The NJ federal court dockets show Sperber has actually filed two lawsuits. She filed her first lawsuit on Feb. 1 (the -691 case) and filed her second, totally separate lawsuit on Feb. 6th (the -768 case). She filed a notice of dismissal of the original -691 case on Feb. 6, and the case was closed the following day, Feb. 7.
There's an attorney certification, signed Feb. 6, attached to Sperber's second lawsuit, saying "I hereby certify that, to my knowledge, the matter in controversy in this action is not the subject of any other pending lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding." Is that accurate? Was the original lawsuit still "pending" on the 6th? I don't know the local rules well in NJ so perhaps another attorney can enlighten me. It's a technical point, but you want to cross all your "t"s and dot all your "i"s if you're filing this kind of lawsuit.
--Also, what's the reason for filing a lawsuit, then dismissing it entirely a week later? Why not just file an amended complaint? It's quite unusual, in my experience, to see this.
--I don't see any facts or allegations linking the defendant to New Jersey. Has he ever been to NJ? Done much business there? Just on the face of the complaint, how does a New Jersey federal court have personal jurisdiction over the defendant? This may be the bigger problem. You can obviously sue the guy in Michigan, but establishing personal jurisdiction in a NJ court may be difficult. >>
Uhmmmm - huh?
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful.
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ?
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
You're welcome. Allow me to interpret - that was layman for.... WTF???
I mean - seriously - who is going to be able to answer your questions? The only one capable is our attorney and he doesn't post here. Even if he did, he wouldn't. So what kind of response did you expect other than HUH?
EAC 6024
I have no idea who Paul is and wether he has anything, depending on what is in the suit he may not even respond.
Does Paul have 14/21 days to respond?
+ 1 to what RYK said
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
<< <i>I searched my PM history and Paul Elwell was board member "ProofCents". I had a couple dealings with him in 2010.
-Paul >>
I remember him.
Took me like six months to get paid via a transaction on the BST forums here (not a cheap coin either, at least, for me) after sending him the coin first, based on his "good name".
Vowed never to deal with him again.
peacockcoins
Reputations are important at any level of play.
"Man lives by his rep." - West Indian Archie
Eric
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
You're welcome. Allow me to interpret - that was layman for.... WTF???
I mean - seriously - who is going to be able to answer your questions? The only one capable is our attorney and he doesn't post here. Even if he did, he wouldn't. So what kind of response did you expect other than HUH? >>
I'm guessing the kind of response he's expecting is where folks gush over how smart of a legal mind he has, and how folks will trip over themselves wanting his talents for all sorts of other matters.
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
<< <i>
I'm guessing the kind of response he's expecting is where folks gush over how smart of a legal mind he has, and how folks will trip over themselves wanting his talents for all sorts of other matters.
EVP >>
Yep, EVP, you found me out. People ask me all the time -- how did you graduate a top 10 law school and make partner at one of the 10 biggest law firms in US ? -- and my answer is always the same. US Coin forums, baby.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
Subject matter and personal jurisdiction are, while at times complicated, issues that any attorney would certainly look into before filing a lawsuit. This is civil procedure 101 stuff that I'm sure a well respected attorney would not miss. I don't know the attorneys involved, but I'm guessing that the Plaintiff isn't hiring second rate counsel that would gaff such a basic issue.
Wondercoin
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest.
<< <i>
<< <i>
I'm guessing the kind of response he's expecting is where folks gush over how smart of a legal mind he has, and how folks will trip over themselves wanting his talents for all sorts of other matters.
EVP >>
Yep, EVP, you found me out. People ask me all the time -- how did you graduate a top 10 law school and make partner at one of the 10 biggest law firms in US ? -- and my answer is always the same. US Coin forums, baby.
/eyeroll
You come on here and get all lawyer-like in this place. When we point out that this is a coin forum, you persist in pushing your lawyer-like acumen. I guess they don't teach common sense in your law school. Personally, I don't believe you are a top-notch lawyer, don't believe you graduated from a top-10 law school and don't believe you're a partner at one of the 10 biggest law firms in the US. All I see is you want to prove how good of a lawyer you are to a bunch of coin weenies. Nice move. Sharp. Smart. You win - you're a much better lawyer than I am. Happy?
Since you're a lawyer, you must know some Latin. How do you say "horse's patootie" in Latin? Is it something like "writ of habeas patootie"? Or is it "cogito ergo patootie"?
/eyeroll
EVP
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
While this is true, I am certain that Dale Kinsella took everything into account when he chose where to file
<< <i>
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest. >>
Very interesting question. I think the "injury", as it allegedly occurred in NJ and other places, probably gives the court in NJ what's called "subject matter jurisdiction." But you still need the "personal jurisdiction" piece, and if it's just a guy sitting in his basement in Michigan posting stuff online, I don't know that that creates enough contacts with NJ to do the trick. There's probably case law on it, but it would take someone to research it. Presumably the attys who filed the lawsuit believe they have enough; but my only comment is that usually I'd want to see more in the complaint establishing the guy's contacts with NJ.
<< <i> Since you're a lawyer, you must know some Latin. How do you say "horse's patootie" in Latin? >>
In Latin, it's an acronym. E-V-P.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest. >>
There are many jurisdictional issues to consider in an internet based injury claim. I assume the plaintiff's lawyers considered them before filing. However, if Legend is in NJ and filed there, I'm assuming that the simplest analysis was to file where you live and where you were injured and make others come to your home. But that is just an assumption.
I should add that this is a federal question jurisdiction case so jurisdiction would be in federal court and your question is more of a proper venue question, or where is the best place to try the case. But the analysis is the same. Also, defamation is a state law claim, so I need to pull the complaint to see what is up here. There are undoubtedly multiple counts, including at least one federal question count, which would require a federal court to take jurisdiction and which would allow the federal court to assume jurisdiction over the pendant state law claims. But I need to see the complaint to say more.
Tom
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i> Uhmmmm - huh? >>
Thanks for the analysis. Very helpful. >>
Isn't the court document specific enough to allege a violation of Federal Civil Code, which would encompass an action committed in any state ? >>
You cannot sue a person anywhere you want. The NJ court must have "personal jurisdiction" over a defendant -- basically, the defendant must have enough contacts with NJ (traveling there, owning property there, etc.) for the court to have power over him. It's an ancient doctrine which protects people from having to defend lawsuits in far-flung places with which they have little contact. You can sue him where he's located, but to sue him where you're located is not always so easy.
Are there different jurisdiction considerations for an Internet-based injury claim? The "injury" might be considered to have occurred in NJ, MI, and anywhere else. I am no attorney, but I find this part of the case to be of interest. >>
There are many jurisdictional issues to consider in an internet based injury claim. I assume the plaintiff's lawyers considered them before filing. However, if Legend is in NJ and filed there, I'm assuming that the simplest analysis was to file where you live and where you were injured and make others come to your home. But that is just an assumption.
I should add that this is a federal question jurisdiction case so jurisdiction would be in federal court and your question is more of a proper venue question, or where is the best place to try the case. But the analysis is the same. Also, defamation is a state law claim, so I need to pull the complaint to see what is up here. There are undoubtedly multiple counts, including at least one federal question count, which would require a federal court to take jurisdiction and which would allow the federal court to assume jurisdiction over the pendant state law claims. But I need to see the complaint to say more. >>
+ 1 The federal courts really do not like accepting cases that traditionally belong in state courts (i.e. defamation suits) so it will be interesting to see just what hook is being used here to keep this one out of state court.
What does Ms. Sperber want to see happen? I don't know the defendant's financial situation, but collection of judgments is often much more difficult than obtaining them. If the Defendant responds and this case goes forward to a trial it will take alot of time, alot of $, and Ms. Sperber will go through much strain and disclosure along the way. She's claiming damage, and showing it, for some folks, is more invasive than a false post. Litigation is no fun (except for the attorneys).
Financially this makes no sense. Economy damages are tough to prove, especially with the frequent releases with big numbers and painting a rosy picture. Non-economy damages are speculative, and difficult to collect if awared. Is there anyone that is know that didn't transact business with her as a result of the false posts? And that is making a very large assumption that she wins.
This will, no question, cause the Defendant's life to suck. I again assume that the evidence is overwhelming that the Defendant is the person that typed and hit enter to post the comments. If it wasn't him she is dealing with entirely different problems.
This whole litigation is dragging up something that seemed to be forgotten. Is the vindication of a court order, which few will see, and making his life suck, worth the hassle?
I'm sure that there were many long and well thought out conversations with the attorneys about the consequences of this case. I'm just curious what an ideal outcome would be? - Thanks
but I feel it is a bad idea to mention someones name and town on an internet website owned by a publically traded company (it may be even against a posty rule).
If FBI, PIs, and computer hacker dream team was used in your investigation, the info maybe good. There should be ongoing criminal investigations and criminal charges following this civil suit.
If my source was from info subpoenaed from an extortionist web site, I would worry about validity. I also would be concerned about if my computer security skills were better than theirs. I could see nothing worse than making false accusations against someone whose info was found by hacking my own website....
Usually congratulations and accolades come after conviction.
Financially this makes no sense.
YOU ARE CORRECT, YET WE WILL DO THIS EVERY TIME WE NEED TO DO SO
This will, no question, cause the Defendant's life to suck.
YOU ARE CORRECT, BUT HE BROUGHT IT UPON HIMSELF
This whole litigation is dragging up something that seemed to be forgotten. Is the vindication of a court order, which few will see, and making his life suck, worth the hassle?
FORGOTTEN? THAT IS SILLY. MAYBE ON THIS CHATROOM - YET IT IS STILL OUT THERE FOR THE WORLD TO SEE.
I'm sure that there were many long and well thought out conversations with the attorneys about the consequences of this case. I'm just curious what an ideal outcome would be? - Thanks
NO ONE EVER EVER POSTING CRAP LIKE THAT AGAIN WOULD BE A GOOD START
<< <i>In Latin, it's an acronym. E-V-P. >>
POTD!
Sometimes the bad conduct of another should not be allowed to go unpunished (even if all you get out of the lawsuit is a judgment that says you were right and the defendant was wrong). This is particularly true in cases where one's reputation is wrongfully tarnished/trashed by false statements. If one's reputation is the thing that is most important to your continued success in your chosen field, then the time and expense of a lawsuit that can give you vindication in the form of a judgment determining that the defendant was wrong may be well worth it.
By analogy what this case seems to involve is a bully who has picked on someone who has decided to fight back.
I remember in middle school a situation where an 8th grade bully decided to pick on a 7th grade classmate of mine. The outcome of the preliminary hallway skirmish was a challenge by the 8th grader for the 7th grader to "meet him on the playground after school to fight". Well it just so happened that the 7th grade classmate of mine was, though a small asian kid who wore glasses, tough as nails and not afraid to stand up for himself. Word spread throughout the school of the "challenge" and thus a large crowd showed up on the playground after school to see what would happen. Turned out that the 8th grade bully throughout the day began to realize that he may have picked on the wrong 7th grader. In the end the 7th grader showed up and the 8th grade bully never showed up.
The following day the 7th grader was the object of praise from the other students in the school while the 8th grader was the recipient of derision, including other students clucking like a chicken whenever he walked by
Or are there other instances besides this one?
Also, why is the case listed as a matter of copyright infringement?
The Penny Lady®
<< <i>It's my understanding that Laura's photograph is trademarked - and I don't know if her name and/or her company's name is trademarked - but since Paul used her photo without permission in the ripoff report. that would account for the copy right infringement claim which must be adjudicated in federal court. >>
Interesting. I loathe the extortion business model of Ripoff Report, and I really support a lot of things Laura is advocating.
I was able to find this as well. It mentions the use of the photo. Also, it seems that the "Laura Sperber" on ripoff report was not actually her, but someone impersonating her, and THAT impersonation is the crux of the lawsuit. I'm not a lawyer, though, so take my interpretation with a grain of salt.
The report is still on the Internet, high ranking for Internet searches and the subject matter relates to Legend's business. Before initiating a new business relationship, many people check for online cumsumer reports so it is likely this would appear. Perhaps estimated damages can be related to search ranking, e.g. first Google search result, first Google result page, etc. Perhaps the issue would also be less serious if the alleged cyber-bully removed his posts. Has he done that?
NGC registry V-Nickel proof #6!!!!
working on proof shield nickels # 8 with a bullet!!!!
RIP "BEAR"
Tom
Laura, Bruce et al you have my support and best wishes for a successful outcome in defending your good name.
There are times you must take a stand and this in my humble opinion is one of those. Good luck!
Website-Americana Rare Coin Inc
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
This "Ripoff report" web site model is troubling. They are for-profit and allow anyone to post without proof. Then they charge you to clear your name. Sounds like an on-line protection racket.
<< <i>Congratulations on finding the perpetrator. Paul Elwell is now banned to buy/sell/trade with me. I think he collects Matte Proof Lincolns.
This "Ripoff report" web site model is troubling. They are for-profit and allow anyone to post without proof. Then they charge you to clear your name. Sounds like an on-line protection racket. >>
This is an ongoing problem for many companies dealing with on-line reviews. The hosting companies do not require any proof, or only minimal proof, and then they defend themselves on the basis that they are only "hosting" companies. Lawsuits against the hosting companies are usually unsuccessful, but the trend appears to be changing a little bit. I represent a number of companies, including at least one coin company that deals with this and it is frustrating.
Typically, when a false or defamatory report is issued, you must obtain information on the poster from the hosting company, which in and of itself can be frustrating, and then you must pursue the individual wrongdoer. The interesting thing about the Sperber case, from my viewpoint, is that she has sued the hosting company, it appears, in Arizona, for copyright infringement, which is a bit of a new twist for me.
Tom
Paul Elwell is the only currently named defendant but the complaint does list Does 1-10 and states that they were responsible in some manner for the acts and transactions alleged in the complaint.
The Complaint is filed in federal court on the basis of federal question (federal law) jurisdiction and diversity of citizenship jurisdiction too.
I do not know why it was filed, dismissed and re-filed as from my first quick reading the new complaint appears to be identical to the original one.
Factual personal jurisdiction allegations are not set out in any detail, but presumably the claim is that the internet defamation was published in New Jersey as well as other states, giving minimum contacts with New Jersey. I have not done any research to see if an internet publication constitutes minimum contacts so that the defendant can expect to be sued in any state that publication reaches.
This will be an interesting case to follow. I am glad someone can stand up to this kind of anonymous behavior. However, principle is expensive to litigate. Hope the alleged wrongdoer has some financial ability.