• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Ron Smith suing someone who complained about a delay in his Smith Enteprise order

Wow....way to dick yourself out of business SEI! Looks like most of the posts on that thread are potential customers swearing off buying SEIs products...
 
Who was that dickwad shill on the Hide for them that kept ranting and raving about their shit a couple years back? I know LL gave him a permanent ban for not putting up or shutting up.
 
Trial by jury for flaming on a forum? Sheesh, and I thought my life was exciting.
 
I didn't really look at the complaint, but it's unlikely that the Arizona court has jurisdiction over Hammonds. He could have it removed to his state of residence unless he has some ties to Arizona.
 
Ron Smith suing someone who complained about a delay in his Smith Enteprise o...

AMF said:
I didn't really look at the complaint, but it's unlikely that the Arizona court has jurisdiction over Hammonds. He could have it removed to his state of residence unless he has some ties to Arizona.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should look at the complaint.

Can anyone find an allegation that the plaintiff has suffered seventy-five thousand dollars in damages? < That's a hint.
 
Last edited:
Graham - What am I wrong about? I'm not talking about diversity jurisdiction. I am speaking of personal jurisdiction. If you don't understand the difference, I am happy to explain it. "Intentionally placing defamatory information on the internet is not, by itself, sufficient to subject the author or the owner of the website to personal jurisdiction in the state where the defamed party resides." Perhaps you know something that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals doesn't.
 
Last edited:
AMF said:
Graham - What am I wrong about? I'm not talking about diversity jurisdiction. I am speaking of personal jurisdiction. If you don't understand the difference, I am happy to explain it. "Intentionally placing defamatory information on the internet is not, by itself, sufficient to subject the author or the owner of the website to personal jurisdiction in the state where the defamed party resides." Perhaps you know something that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals doesn't.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the research and straight talk! Question, what is sufficient? (according to the court)
 
Ron Smith suing someone who complained about a delay in his Smith Enteprise o...

BTW, it's not a defamation suit.
 
Last edited:
I think Pat M has one thing right...Usually in cases like this, the lawyers are the only true winners. To be certain the attorneys are the ones who make most of the money in cases like this.
 
Ron Smith suing someone who complained about a delay in his Smith Enteprise o...

Unknown said:
I think Pat M has one thing right...Usually in cases like this, the lawyers are the only true winners. To be certain the attorneys are the ones who make most of the money in cases like this.
Click to expand...
It sounds like you want to blame the attorneys. They provide a service, that's all. If the plaintiff insists on doing something that might go against his best interests, and they advise him of that, then how is it the fault of the lawyers?

Of course, on this one, I sure hope they got their money up front.
 
At one of my first jobs out of law school there was a case where two guys paid over $100,000 in attorney's fees fighting over only $10,000. My boss said his favourite client was someone with money and principles.
 
Pat M, Unknown - from a fellowWashingtonian to each of you: It's best to just let the attorneys compare the respective size of their genitalia in peace.:p
 
Last edited:
Graham,
I don't "blame" attorneys, nor did I say it was their "fault". Attorneys can't do anything without someone asking them to. Without someone initiating this case, the attorneys would be doing other things. I merely pointed out that the attorneys are likely the only people to make the most profit from this case. That is typically what happens in lawsuits though.

Although there are some suits where the plaintiff does well, in the majority of lawsuits, the attorneys end up making the most money per hour. Usually, even if the plaintiff wins, his per hour winnings are usually less than his attorney's.
 
Ron Smith suing someone who complained about a delay in his Smith Enteprise o...

Read the motion to dismiss. It is instructive.

If that Complaint had been filed in the jurisdiction in which I practice the motion to dismiss would likely have been accompanied by a motion for sanctions.
 
Last edited:
I keep reading about how SEI has been providing poor service to customers. I have had a diferent experience with them. I have done quite a bit of business with them over the years and have been treated very well to include phone calls by Ron Smith making sure I was getting the right products. Follow up calls making sure they worked OK. Granted I was ordering things for my Dept. but I have had excellent service from them. Last big purchase was around 2011 though. Sometimes things change.

After having such good service from SEI, I was interested in one of their recievers. Then I saw one. The engraving on it looked like someones little sister did it in kindergarten class. Fugly!
 
Unknown said:
Graham,
I don't "blame" attorneys, nor did I say it was their "fault". Attorneys can't do anything without someone asking them to. Without someone initiating this case, the attorneys would be doing other things. I merely pointed out that the attorneys are likely the only people to make the most profit from this case. That is typically what happens in lawsuits though.

Although there are some suits where the plaintiff does well, in the majority of lawsuits, the attorneys end up making the most money per hour. Usually, even if the plaintiff wins, his per hour winnings are usually less than his attorney's.
Click to expand...
-
In Oregon, Lawyers and the State are the winners . With the State being the big winner every time, as 'by state law' they take 60% off the top of all punitive damage awarded .
.
 
60% off the top, of all Punitive damages? How the hell is that justified? They are not the ones who were 'wronged' to create the causation of Punitive Damages to begin with. That totally blows my mind.

Ya'll are voting for the wrong people, and allowing the wrong laws to exist.
 
Sean the Nailer said:
60% off the top, of all Punitive damages? How the hell is that justified? They are not the ones who were 'wronged' to create the causation of Punitive Damages to begin with. That totally blows my mind.

Ya'll are voting for the wrong people, and allowing the wrong laws to exist.
Click to expand...

Prophetic considering where you live. Oregon is a State run entirely by the 503 area code. Used to be a red state but alas, has not voted for a Republican for President since Reagan. 60%? Another surprise from the Neo-Socialists in the Willamette Valley. After the Lawyer fees are paid why bother?
 
I have read a number of posts regarding SEI on the hide in that last couple of weeks. It looks like a large number of buyers, were just about to send in a large order, and just happened to read about this on the hide, and have now decided to business with someone else! I'm just amazed at how many buyers, on just the hide alone have decided not to order from SEI, I don't mean way out in the future, but "just about to send in a large order" types!!! I just don't see how they can stay in business much longer, with that large a drop in demand. I just wonder how long it will take before we all get a chance to buy the "remaining stock" for a penny on the dollar. I also guess, those with SEI products will be selling them for 1/2 price (or less) as no one would really want to be seen with anything they make, not after this!
 
Sean the Nailer said:
60% off the top, of all Punitive damages? How the hell is that justified? They are not the ones who were 'wronged' to create the causation of Punitive Damages to begin with. That totally blows my mind.

Ya'll are voting for the wrong people, and allowing the wrong laws to exist.
Click to expand...
-
Yes this State is very ingenious at ways to keep itself fed and fat off the public, they love stealing money and not working for it .

-
 
softcock said:
-
In Oregon, Lawyers and the State are the winners . With the State being the big winner every time, as 'by state law' they take 60% off the top of all punitive damage awarded .
.
Click to expand...

Don't confuse punitive damages and compensatory damages. Compensatory damages are designed to make the plaintiff whole. Medical bills, lost wages, out of pocket expenses, pain and suffering etc. Punitive damages are just that, punishment for the defendant's actions. You don't often see punitive damages as they are available only in the most egregious cases. If you are t-boned by a driver that doesn't see a stop sign you can be compensated for your damages. If you are t-boned by a drunk driver a jury may award you compensatory damages and may also assess an additional penalty against the drunk. In some states, the state gets a percentage of the punitive damage award on the theory that the drunk's behavior endangered everyone. The vast, vast majority of cases are settled without trial. I don't practice Personal Injury law but it stands to reason that those settlements, in states that do take a percentage of punitive damages, are couched in terms of only compensatory damages.
 
My confusion is just lack of legal knowledge and punitive/compensatory is different . I was also a little off on how much they steal off the top of what is Not There's .
So it's ( Not 60% )
but it's ( really 70% ) . The difference in punitive/compensatory does not change my option about my state being a thieving parasitic cocksucker & I am sure that I am NOT confused about that .

Hey Oregon does legally state that you are guaranteed to your 10% by Law .
-
. . Upon the entry of a verdict including an award of punitive damages, the Department of Justice becomes a judgment creditor as to the amounts payable under paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, and the punitive damage portion of an award shall be allocated as follows:
. . 30 % is payable to the prevailing party. The attorney for the prevailing party shall be paid out of the amount allocated under this paragraph, in the amount agreed upon between the attorney and the prevailing party. However, in no event may more than 20 % of the amount awarded as punitive damages be paid to the attorney for the prevailing party.
. . 60 % percent is payable to the Attorney General for deposit in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Account of the Department of Justice Crime Victims Assistance Section .
. . 10 % percent is payable to the Attorney General for deposit in the State Court Facilities and Security Account .
-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lonegunman762x51
Never date a schoolteacher who makes amateur porn.......
Replies
158
Views
19K
pmclaine
pmclaine
M
Smith Enterprises, Inc. Suing over a forum post.
Replies
255
Views
25K
mescalito
M
Bowman
16 Page Article about LEOs
Replies
33
Views
3K
Jedi5150
J
cal50
DOCTORS' SLANG, MEDICAL SLANG AND MEDICAL ACRONYMS
Replies
15
Views
4K
Cardboard55
C
daybreak1199
Maggie’s Funniest thing I've read in a long time...Gecko45
Replies
48
Views
7K
maximusdecimusmeridius
maximusdecimusmeridius
Top Bottom
Back