Now that's funny Skip! See, we can rib each other a little bit without actully being insulting.
--- In [email protected], "Skip Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > `As for you calling me an "ambulance chaser,"' > I have it on good authority that Tommy, BB82 or whoever in hell this > is, limits himself to chasing monster trucks; and you can take that to > the bank. > > > --- In [email protected], "bluebishop82" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Nice backtrack. Now you're just projecting your lack of > > understanding on to me. My original post made no mention of the > > bankruptcy clause. It was your original post that tried to make it > > seem the redevelopment rights would stay clear of the bankruptcy > > court (that was the point of your post), which you clearly concede > > now that it won't. > > > > As for your assertion that the lawyers you work with > > aren't "practicing in AP" (as if that is beneath them), well, that's > > just you pointing out again your disdain for people from Asbury Park > > and this area in general, which is how we met in the first place, > > isn't it? > > > > As for you calling me an "ambulance chaser," when my adversary has > > nothing left to retort with but name calling, that's when I know > > I've won the arguement. > > > > By the way, if you read that old triCity article, you will find I > > never called into question your abilities in your field. I wouldn't > > do that. I made the point that I thought you would have a conflict > > on one matter: valuing the triangle property, due to your comments > > about (and obvious feeling toward) the parties. Having a conflict > > on a case is not a knock against your abilities. I've been > > conflicted out of a number of cases for a variety of reasons. > > > > Oh, before I forget. There was a mistake of law in your question to > > Jim Aaron - Bankruptcy Court is a court of equity, not law. > > > > Look, you aren't outmatched in this conversation because law is my > > field. You're just outmatched by a guy from AP. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "dfsavgny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "bluebishop82" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > I never said it was "no good." I've read your bragging about > > the > > > > lawyers you deal with being the best there is. Go ask one of > > them > > > > what proceedings you could expect from creditors if this > > provision > > > > is triggered. > > > > > > > > > Tom, there is always litigation, that's why there are lawyers. > > You're > > > good at sound bites but short on proof as always. I hope you go > > into > > > court with more than that. Say what you will but your original > > post > > > made it seem as if the clause was not worth the paper it was > > written > > > on. I am sure you are aware that any creditors would see the > > agreement > > > and see that the city has a reverter clause. Also, creditors have > > the > > > right to remedy any defaults but all have to be approved by the > > city. > > > I will defer to you on bankruptcy law. Be sure that the attorneys > > I > > > work with do not chase ambulances or practice in AP or Toms River. > > In > > > the end you are right that there will be litigation, but > > litigation is > > > not necessrily bad. Sometimes it is the only choice when one party > > to > > > a contract will not perform. Your rationale says that one should > > not > > > ask that party to perform as agreed to in the contract lest they > > > litigate. That is my very early point about having a gun when they > > > other guy knows you'll never pull the trigger. Do you know where > > that > > > gun will land up? You'll need a proctologist to remove it. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
