- Joined
- Nov 30, 2011
- Messages
- 257
This is my final post on the matter, its time to move on. Our entire beef arises from the two sentence post I made above which you circled the second sentence in red. You got hot when I stated that "I'm not so sure you can consolidate cases pending in different states." Youre now changing the goalposts that the generalities my second sentence doesn't (and wasn't intended to) address.That is not, and never has been, a "dispute between states". Your original post was talking about an immediate "original jurisdiction" for the Supreme Court, and now you are trying to rehabilitate your misstatements by turning it into a post-judgment "domesticating the judgment" argument. Sorry to say this, it's NOT an ad hominem attack, you are just a liar. That's not name-calling, that's an actual statement of fact. You are lying by claiming that you didn't say what you actually said.
View attachment 286126
You are behaving like a clown.
On top of that, you completely ignore the fact that the F$U lawsuit and the ACC lawsuit involve some different issues. F$U wants OUT of the ACC. They do NOT want monetary damages. They want a declaratory judgment that the various contracts and GORs are unenforceable.
Which, if you were being honest and "smart" and "gracious", you would acknowledge that the two lawsuits are NOT necessarily deciding the same issues between the same parties.
So just stop it with your BULL****. There is not going to be a monetary "judgment" in the Florida case to be "domesticated".
You want to keep bloviating about your hypotheticals, feel free. But that's not what is going on here.
The Florida courts do NOT need to cede jurisdiction to North Carolina courts over an unsanctioned lawsuit initiated by the ACC administrators (since the ACC membership did not actually vote to sue F$U prior to F$U's Board approving a lawsuit against the ACC).
Two final points:
i) I put my first sentence in the conditional "I'm not so sure you can consolidate cases pending in different states" so as to not be a **** and not call you out directly. I didn't want to embarrass you in front of your fanboys. If I could edit that sentence now and write it in the tone of your responses to me, it would read as follows: "You obviously don't know **** about litigation or civil procedure. You don't even have a rudimentary understanding of the difference between transferring a case and consolidating a case nor how either works. You must have been busy giving out free hand jobs in the bathroom the day they taught this in law school . . . are you even a lawyer? are you? answer the question."
ii) never hate. congratulate.
Last edited: