On the subject of Litigation.......and cleverness
04-28-2003 | 12:05 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Allergic to Nonsense
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,007
Likes: 21
From: Granite Quarry, NC
On the subject of Litigation.......and cleverness
Sadly....... The terms and circumstances of our performance boating world have been infected with an outbreak of legal wrangling. The legal "weapons" have been used in a variety of ways:
1. As a threat....as in "If you don't do such and such...I/we will sue you".......... or ......."If you say such and such....I/we will sue you".....or....."If I/we don't get my/our way I/we will sue you."
This threat carries the weight of forcing one or the other party to invest in legal fees.......and has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
2. As an annoyance/delay tactic...as in ......"I/We refuse to pay you because I/we have a valid actionable breach of an agreement."....or ...... "I/We can't pay you until a court decides".....or...... "I/we won't pay you because legal actions will postpone the process until you run out of desire."........This tactic has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
3. As a confusing tactic........as in....... "The other party claims to have a legal point but I/we assure all interested parties, that due to the specific language of paragraph four, section 2....no conscious action may be taken unless certain specific notice has been given relative to appendix 9 of a prior agreement referred to in section two herein."........ This is generally included in a filibuster like presentation easily identified by its length, earnest format, and wounded innocence tone. This tactic also has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
4. As a calculated crapshoot........ as in............." I have no valid defense for my actions......so what are you going to do about it, sue me?" This one is especially heinous in that courts are unpredictable at best....and of course this has nothing to do with who is right and who is wrong.
Sad,...... aint it? How did we get in this mess? In all fairness, most business negotiations today involve heavy contractual/legal involvement, along with ever increasing liability and government concerns, so the phenomenon is to be expected. However there is still a sizable segment of our society who exist on a promise, a hand shake, or a commitment. this group is dwindling and being replaced by an insect like army of lawyers and MBA's who study things like "Shrewdness in the corporate jungle"...and "How to win at any cost"......... or " Never let the truth stop you......use the Spin technique.".......
So in the long run it comes down to the good lawyers versus the bad ones......... Now how do you tell the difference?
The good lawyers drive catamarans........
T2x
1. As a threat....as in "If you don't do such and such...I/we will sue you".......... or ......."If you say such and such....I/we will sue you".....or....."If I/we don't get my/our way I/we will sue you."
This threat carries the weight of forcing one or the other party to invest in legal fees.......and has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
2. As an annoyance/delay tactic...as in ......"I/We refuse to pay you because I/we have a valid actionable breach of an agreement."....or ...... "I/We can't pay you until a court decides".....or...... "I/we won't pay you because legal actions will postpone the process until you run out of desire."........This tactic has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
3. As a confusing tactic........as in....... "The other party claims to have a legal point but I/we assure all interested parties, that due to the specific language of paragraph four, section 2....no conscious action may be taken unless certain specific notice has been given relative to appendix 9 of a prior agreement referred to in section two herein."........ This is generally included in a filibuster like presentation easily identified by its length, earnest format, and wounded innocence tone. This tactic also has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
4. As a calculated crapshoot........ as in............." I have no valid defense for my actions......so what are you going to do about it, sue me?" This one is especially heinous in that courts are unpredictable at best....and of course this has nothing to do with who is right and who is wrong.
Sad,...... aint it? How did we get in this mess? In all fairness, most business negotiations today involve heavy contractual/legal involvement, along with ever increasing liability and government concerns, so the phenomenon is to be expected. However there is still a sizable segment of our society who exist on a promise, a hand shake, or a commitment. this group is dwindling and being replaced by an insect like army of lawyers and MBA's who study things like "Shrewdness in the corporate jungle"...and "How to win at any cost"......... or " Never let the truth stop you......use the Spin technique.".......
So in the long run it comes down to the good lawyers versus the bad ones......... Now how do you tell the difference?
The good lawyers drive catamarans........
T2x
Last edited by T2x; 04-28-2003 at 12:08 PM.
04-28-2003 | 12:18 PM
#2
Registered
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
From: Lake Charles, LA
we just had item 4 happen to us down here. so we sued and won. we called their bluff and they learned a lesson the hard way. i loved watching the expression on their faces when the jury came back. we were fortunate that the jury did know right from wrong.
04-28-2003 | 12:21 PM
#4
Registered
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,548
Likes: 1
From: Niskayuna, NY
Re: On the subject of Litigation.......and cleverness
Originally posted by T2x
Sadly....... The terms and circumstances of our performance boating world have been infected with an outbreak of legal wrangling. The legal "weapons" have been used in a variety of ways:
1. As a threat....as in "If you don't do such and such...I/we will sue you".......... or ......."If you say such and such....I/we will sue you".....or....."If I/we don't get my/our way I/we will sue you."
This threat carries the weight of forcing one or the other party to invest in legal fees.......and has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
2. As an annoyance/delay tactic...as in ......"I/We refuse to pay you because I/we have a valid actionable breach of an agreement."....or ...... "I/We can't pay you until a court decides".....or...... "I/we won't pay you because legal actions will postpone the process until you run out of desire."........This tactic has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
3. As a confusing tactic........as in....... "The other party claims to have a legal point but I/we assure all interested parties, that due to the specific language of paragraph four, section 2....no conscious action may be taken unless certain specific notice has been given relative to appendix 9 of a prior agreement referred to in section two herein."........ This is generally included in a filibuster like presentation easily identified by its length, earnest format, and wounded innocence tone. This tactic also has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
4. As a calculated crapshoot........ as in............." I have no valid defense for my actions......so what are you going to do about it, sue me?" This one is especially heinous in that courts are unpredictable at best....and of course this has nothing to do with who is right and who is wrong.
Sad,...... aint it? How did we get in this mess? In all fairness, most business negotiations today involve heavy contractual/legal involvement, along with ever increasing liability and government concerns, so the phenomenon is to be expected. However there is still a sizable segment of our society who exist on a promise, a hand shake, or a commitment. this group is dwindling and being replaced by an insect like army of lawyers and MBA's who study things like "Shrewdness in the corporate jungle"...and "How to win at any cost"......... or " Never let the truth stop you......use the Spin technique.".......
So in the long run it comes down to the good lawyers versus the bad ones......... Now how do you tell the difference?
The good lawyers drive catamarans........
T2x
Sadly....... The terms and circumstances of our performance boating world have been infected with an outbreak of legal wrangling. The legal "weapons" have been used in a variety of ways:
1. As a threat....as in "If you don't do such and such...I/we will sue you".......... or ......."If you say such and such....I/we will sue you".....or....."If I/we don't get my/our way I/we will sue you."
This threat carries the weight of forcing one or the other party to invest in legal fees.......and has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
2. As an annoyance/delay tactic...as in ......"I/We refuse to pay you because I/we have a valid actionable breach of an agreement."....or ...... "I/We can't pay you until a court decides".....or...... "I/we won't pay you because legal actions will postpone the process until you run out of desire."........This tactic has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
3. As a confusing tactic........as in....... "The other party claims to have a legal point but I/we assure all interested parties, that due to the specific language of paragraph four, section 2....no conscious action may be taken unless certain specific notice has been given relative to appendix 9 of a prior agreement referred to in section two herein."........ This is generally included in a filibuster like presentation easily identified by its length, earnest format, and wounded innocence tone. This tactic also has nothing to do with who is right or who is wrong.
4. As a calculated crapshoot........ as in............." I have no valid defense for my actions......so what are you going to do about it, sue me?" This one is especially heinous in that courts are unpredictable at best....and of course this has nothing to do with who is right and who is wrong.
Sad,...... aint it? How did we get in this mess? In all fairness, most business negotiations today involve heavy contractual/legal involvement, along with ever increasing liability and government concerns, so the phenomenon is to be expected. However there is still a sizable segment of our society who exist on a promise, a hand shake, or a commitment. this group is dwindling and being replaced by an insect like army of lawyers and MBA's who study things like "Shrewdness in the corporate jungle"...and "How to win at any cost"......... or " Never let the truth stop you......use the Spin technique.".......
So in the long run it comes down to the good lawyers versus the bad ones......... Now how do you tell the difference?
The good lawyers drive catamarans........
T2x
04-28-2003 | 03:24 PM
#9
Registered
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 6,306
Likes: 1
From: Lake Lanier - N. Georgia
All that legal ranglin has provided us with some pretty darn good racing the past 4 years. Hell if we could of had some of that legal ranglin years ago - we might of won the war . HAHA - BH
04-28-2003 | 03:34 PM
#10
Platinum Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,270
Likes: 21
From: Burlington, VT
Just look at your insurance bills.
Tort reform NOW!
Best quote from a friend who was buying an airplane from a guy who said "all is fine all we need is our lawyers to look at this";
-You pay your lawyer be the hour don't you?
-Yes
-So do I, then what's their incentive on us agreeing on something?...
Another
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." (henry VI, Pt. II, Act IV, Sc. 2) Shakespeare
Another
"Lawyers are like nuclear warheads. I have them because the other guy has them, but the first time you use them it fu**s everything up" Larry "the Liquidator" Garfield, Other People's Money, 1991
Tort reform NOW!
Best quote from a friend who was buying an airplane from a guy who said "all is fine all we need is our lawyers to look at this";
-You pay your lawyer be the hour don't you?
-Yes
-So do I, then what's their incentive on us agreeing on something?...
Another
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." (henry VI, Pt. II, Act IV, Sc. 2) Shakespeare
Another
"Lawyers are like nuclear warheads. I have them because the other guy has them, but the first time you use them it fu**s everything up" Larry "the Liquidator" Garfield, Other People's Money, 1991
Last edited by GLH; 04-28-2003 at 03:46 PM.
