[文集] [专题] [检索] [独立评论] [海阔天空] [矛盾江湖] [全版论坛]

独立评论

作者: port   友情提醒海明同志: 小心被法官罚款. 2011-05-06 16:33:07  [点击:1493]
我知道你不在乎你已经臭名昭著了.但我相信你肯定在乎钱. 别把法官惹火了罚你一万刀.

你以为花350刀立个案,就可以给大公司施加舆论压力,榨出钱来,那是你低估了别人,只能证明你是个傻叉. 这类地痞滚刀肉行为,今天在天桥也玩不开了, 别说官司满天飞的美国.


你的诉状里, 说保险公司时代华纳违背协议, 说特纳不履行"照顾桑兰一辈子"的诺言.


可你又没有拿出来协议的副本, 或特纳的原话记录.

日常生活中都知道说话要"有理有据". 更别说讲究"一丝不苟"的法庭了.

你的诉状上讲的, 是理: "他们违约了,所以要赔."

可这仅是一半.而且是后一半.

另一半,即头一半, 是据. 据,就是你说他们违背的那个"协议."

这个协议,在哪里?

法庭或保险公司的律师要是问你:

"不错,违约的, 是该赔偿.可他们违了什么约? 你拿出合同给我们看看."

你如何回答?

我还可以用个简单的常识推理,证明你是胡搅蛮缠,恶意起诉:

你为什么不去起诉西奈医院? 消防局? 摩根银行?

跟他们没关系.所以不去起诉.

跟他们没有的, 是什么关系? 反过来说,有了什么样的关系,你才会起诉一家公司?

协议.

X, 你原来也知道要有合同成立在先,然后才能有违背合同的行为发生啊.一个人,能违背不存在的协议吗?

那被告和你委托人之间的协议在哪里?


傻叉想发财想出名, 这本身没错. You are not wrong.

但你Y是想疯了.

You are out of your mind.

哈哈.





ZT
维基

Filing a claim that is ultimately deemed frivolous can be highly damaging to the attorney so filing. Attorney Daniel Evans writes:

[W]hen a judge calls an argument "ridiculous" or "frivolous," it is absolutely the worst thing the judge could say. It means that the person arguing the position has absolutely no idea of what he is doing, and has completely wasted everyone's time. It doesn't mean that the case wasn't well argued, or that judge simply decided for the other side, it means that there was no other side. The argument was absolutely, positively, incompetent. The judge is not telling you that you were "wrong." The judge is telling you that you are out of your mind.

加跟贴

笔名:     新网友请先注册笔名 密码:
主题: 进文集
内容: