|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 21:43:20 +0000, dhm@best.com wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 30 May 2005, Kent Wills wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Ok. I can imagine some schmuck sadistically labeling a 40ish white male
>>> out of line as wacko. That is what I see in the postings h
|
|
|
Falky foo wrote:
> Can't say I'm a fan of globalization -- seems like it just makes the rich
> richer -- but it appears to me that Chirac made a huge mistake giving the EU
> "constitution" to the people to ratify. The international elites must be
>
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Kent Wills wrote:
>>
>> Ok. I can imagine some schmuck sadistically labeling a 40ish white male
>> out of line as wacko. That is what I see in the postings here.
>
> How so?
Like the people here who sadistically asser
|
|
|
In misc.legal Marcie <sn_ppy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have found using the online forms on LawDepot.com to be easy, in
> particular over landlord and leasing details. They have a variety of
> forms to choose from that will hold up in court if it comes t
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 20:15:51 +0000, dhm@best.com wrote:
>
>On Mon, 30 May 2005, Kent Wills wrote:
>
>>> run the bar, the shrinks don't. From what I've read here, Ken didn't
>>> submit to an order to take their mental exam.
>>>
>>
>> And rightl
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:17:53 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Ken Smith wrote:
>
>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>> Ken Smith wrote:
>
>>>> "Ken, you obviously have keen insight and a sharp intellect."
>>>>
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Kent Wills wrote:
>> run the bar, the shrinks don't. From what I've read here, Ken didn't
>> submit to an order to take their mental exam.
>>
>
> And rightly so. The bar lacked the authority under law to
> require it.
>
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:53:38 +0000, dhm@best.com wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 30 May 2005, "- Prof. Jonez©" wrote:
>
>>>
>>> They may not have felt the case was ripe until you had taken a mental
>>> exam.
>>
>> 1) He has taken an exam.
>> 2) His case
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:22:47 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Kent Wills wrote:
>
>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>> MeowMeow wrote:
>
>>>> You had a chance to prove you were mentally well and wouldnt.
>
>>> Maybe bec
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:36:32 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> You can believe Ken or you can believe me, or you can believe us both. If
>> you wish, you can presume we are both lying. Ultimately it doesn't matter.
>
|
|
|
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e7rm91583h230a7b20fsp1dgddt1jaf2sq@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 May 2005 09:36:32 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
> <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >> You can believe Ken or you can believe me, or
|
|
|
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:h35m91194oob30a87iah3i7d7os86id2d6@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 May 2005 05:48:52 -0700, "MeowMeow" <MeowMeow@scratch.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >
|
|
|
On Tue, 31 May 2005 01:32:38 +0000, dhm@best.com wrote:
>
>
>On Mon, 30 May 2005, Jon Beaver wrote:
>
>>> And rightly so. The bar lacked the authority under law to
>>> require it.
>>
>> If you could convince ANY COURT of that, we wouldn't even
|
|
|
Law Offices of Charles Dobkin offers you the finest legal
representation, that you can trust on. Licensed in New York (NY) and
New Jersey (NJ). Located in Bay Ridge, Brooklynwe have been serving
clients with different ethnic backgrounds and different l
|
|
|
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
--0-1650053281-1117475207=:80481
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed
Content-
|
|
|
The new url for Vexatious_Litigant is given below. As usual,
contributions, case law, etc, welcome.
http://www.2hot2cool.com/11/vexlitigant/index.html
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 19:49:03 GMT, Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:53:38 +0000, dhm@best.com wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>On Mon, 30 May 2005, "- Prof. Jonez©" wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> They may not have felt the case was ripe unti
|
|
|
Inmates seek damages over naked detention at Michigan prison.
DETROIT (AP) _ Linda Rose says she spent three hours crouched in the
corner of a concrete cell at the Saginaw County Jail, shivering and
sobbing, after deputies stripped her of her clothe
|
|
|
On Mon, 30 May 2005 05:48:52 -0700, "MeowMeow" <MeowMeow@scratch.net>
wrote:
>
>"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2jsl91l6p5t7c2stgpuosrs7kpi49blrh2@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 29 May 2005 22:41:14 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
>> <
|
|
|
dhm@best.com wrote:
> On Mon, 30 May 2005, "- Prof. Jonez©" wrote:
>
> > >
> > > They may not have felt the case was ripe until you had taken a
> > > mental exam.
> >
> > 1) He has taken an exam.
> > 2) His case has standing the moment he was den
|
|
|
May 30, 2005 - Big Brother really will be watching. Police
Commissioner Ray Kelly has told top police brass that he wants to put
up about 400 surveillance cameras on high-crime and high-traffic
streets to catch crooks in the act, even if cops are not t
|
|
|
>>> What I say is incorrigible for those who have the skill to look.
>> So to disagree with Ken Smith is to either be corrupt or unskilled?
>
>
>
> At this point, you appear to be unskilled.
Attacking me doesn't explain your repeated
|
|
|
>>Tobin
>> Why do you need people on Usenet to tell you why you are wrong when you have multiple court rulings that do just that?
>
>
>
> Tobin, if you genuinely believe that the government is always right
>and the King can do no wrong, and you re
|
|
|
On Sun, 29 May 2005 22:41:14 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>MeowMeow wrote:
>
>> You had a chance to prove you were mentally well and wouldnt.
>
>Maybe because he COULDN'T!
You constantly fail to acknowledge that
|
|
|
I've heard the same thing from customers at the hotel I work out of.
Some of them have suggested trying out http://www.lawdepot.com. Its
an online legal forms firm and you can download basic to complicated
forms for a reasonable fee. For about $19 g
|
|
|
I've heard the same thing from customers at the hotel I work out of.
Some of them have suggested trying out http://www.lawdepot.com. Its
an online legal forms firm and you can download basic to complicated
forms for a reasonable fee. For about $19 g
|
|
|
dhm@best.com wrote:
> On Sun, 29 May 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
>
> > The Tenth Circuit admitted in Smith v. Mullarkey that I had made a
> > general constitutional attack on the rules governing the admission
> > of lawyers to practice in Colorado. So,
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> MeowMeow wrote:
>
>
>>You had a chance to prove you were mentally well and wouldnt.
>
>
> Maybe because he COULDN'T!
Ted, it's not exactly a characteristic of mental health to be talking to
your own sock-puppet.
|
|
|
I have found using the online forms on LawDepot.com to be easy, in
particular over landlord and leasing details. They have a variety of
forms to choose from that will hold up in court if it comes to it. I
had to evict a tenant. For a mere $19 I fil
|
|
|
Kent Wills wrote:
> MeowMeow wrote:
>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>>> MeowMeow wrote:
>>>>> You had a chance to prove you were mentally well and wouldnt.
>>>> Maybe because he COULDN'T!
>>> You constantly fail to ackno
|
|
|
Kent Wills wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> MeowMeow wrote:
>>> You had a chance to prove you were mentally well and wouldnt.
>> Maybe because he COULDN'T!
> You constantly fail to acknowledge that Ken has, in fact, taken a
> psychologi
|
|
|
Wayne Delia wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> MeowMeow wrote:
>>> You had a chance to prove you were mentally well and wouldnt.
>> Maybe because he COULDN'T!
> Ted, it's not exactly a characteristic of mental health to be talking to
> yo
|
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>> Ken Smith wrote:
>>> "Ken, you obviously have keen insight and a sharp intellect."
>>> - Theodore A. Kaldis
>> Intellect relates to knowledge and reasoning capabil
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
>>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>>Ken Smith wrote:
>
>>>>It is better that you keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you are
>>>>a fool, rather than open your mouth and remove all possible doubt.
>>>
|
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070306020302000908010002
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MeowMeow wrote:
[more of Ted's drivel]
--------------0703060203020
|
|
|
"Kent Wills" <compuelf@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2jsl91l6p5t7c2stgpuosrs7kpi49blrh2@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 29 May 2005 22:41:14 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
> <kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >MeowMeow wrote:
> >
> >> You had a chance to
|
|
|
On 30 May 2005 20:48:13 GMT, TOTE@dog-play.com wrote:
>In misc.legal Marcie <sn_ppy@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I have found using the online forms on LawDepot.com to be easy, in
>> particular over landlord and leasing details. They have a variety of
>>
|
|
|
On Sun, 29 May 2005 03:44:48 GMT, "Falky foo"
<falkyfoo@bonksbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> You mean the club started by Brandon, (Randian Knights? As I say. Do
>> you actually believe that John Galt would be in any @$#*ing club?
>
>Honey, John Galt was a
|
|
|
On Sun, 29 May 2005 13:41:38 -0700, "Theodore A. Kaldis"
<kaldis@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Ken Smith wrote:
>
>> Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>> Ken Smith wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>> Besides, you have an alternative way to confirm my analysis: simply
|
|
|
On Sun, 29 May 2005, Ken Smith wrote:
> The Tenth Circuit admitted in Smith v. Mullarkey that I had made a general
> constitutional attack on the rules governing the admission of lawyers to
> practice in Colorado. So, why didn't they hear my
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
>
>
>>It is better that you keep your mouth shut and let everyone think you are a
>>fool, rather than open your mouth and remove all possible doubt.
>
> Ken Smith is able to quote this dictum, but not
|
|
|
Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote:
>>Theodore A. Kaldis wrote:
>>>Ken Smith wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>>Besides, you have an alternative way to confirm my analysis: simply
>>>>*examine* the pertinent caselaw for yourself.
>>>
>>>And make
|
|
