Linonut wrote:
* rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
Then why did they bother? And, if SFLC was at such a disadvantage, why
wouldn't big ol' Verizon just go ahead and let little ol' SFLC take its
beating in court?
Wake up and smell the coffee.
FACT: The SFLC moved to dismiss the action with PREJUDICE against the
SFLC's own clients... obviously Verizon objected to a dismissal
*without* prejudice so the *only* way SFLC could extricate Andersen and
Landley's legal ass was to dismiss *with* PREJUDICE against its own
clients frivolous case.
FACT: The utter nonsense about settling with *non-defendant* Actiontec
was face saving spin to cover the fact that Verizon ran the SFLC out of
court via a dismissal with PREJUDICE.
Sincerely,
Rjack :)
--- "[A] breach by one party does not automatically result in rescission
of a contract. Id. at 238 ("New York law does not presume the rescission
or abandonment of a contract and the party asserting rescission or
abandonment has the burden of proving it")."; Atlantis Information
Technology, Gmbh v, CA Inc., 2007 WL 1238716 (United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York, 2007). ---
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
