O'Keeffe Daily News Article this Morning

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Hey, I know: let's start a trade organization to boost the image of the hobby in the public eye. We can orchestrate a fast response public relations effort to handle articles like this. I figure if we get 20 prominent dealers and investors to pony up $10,000 each...

Adam, good idea. You'll also need some fancy stationary on which are written vague threats to unnamed persons who dare to besmirch our great hobby. Because as you can see, vague threats really serve to shut up those pesky critics.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Adam, good idea. You'll also need some fancy stationary on which are written vague threats to unnamed persons who dare to besmirch our great hobby. Because as you can see, vague threats really serve to shut up those pesky critics.

It's those cranky people on chatboards that are the real problem. That is what those "hobby do-good" organizations are going to expose . Or do I have that backwards.....well, anyway, those organizations are going to include, ....I mean root out.....the bad guys!!

[Kenny Cole]

I do a lot of fraud cases. By virtue of the area in which I practice, I have a fraud count in at least half my cases. You always plead the who, what, when, where and why as specifically as possible to avoid motions to dismiss. That's just the way it is.

If my goal was to remain a low profile collector, I probably wouldn't be happy either. Unfortunately, when you become involved in an alleged fraudulent scheme, wittingly or unwittingly, that goal ends up being subordinate to the more important goal of facilitating the truth-finding process. And, as Jeff mentioned earlier, pleadings are open to the media unless there is a pretty compelling reason to seal them. The pleadings aren't evidence, they're just allegations. Either a judge or a jury will sort them out later.

Kenny Cole

[Peter_Spaeth]

Ah, the mindset of a rapacious plaintiff's lawyer (redundant, I know). EDIT TO ADD As I said above, I understand why names were named, but I think a pleading could have been fashioned that would have survived dismissal without doing so.

[Kenny Cole]

Hell, its you damn defense lawyers that are always trying to either hide or excuse their client's fraud. We're just trying to expose what y'all are hired to confuse, conceal, or otherwise try to justify.

Kenny

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Hell, its you damn defense lawyers that are always trying to either hide or excuse their client's fraud. We're just trying to expose what y'all are hired to confuse, conceal, or otherwise try to justify.

Kenny

I resemble that remark.

[Kenny Cole]

LOL, I bet. But you get paid either way. I only get paid if I win.

[iggyman]

All of these funny lawyer jokes are making me a bit dizzy. Can we get some other type of humor in this thread? Perhaps, some dentist jargon?

Here is my small contribution...

binary clock.jpg

In my line of work, that is funny!

Lovely Day...

[nolemmings]

Peter, I agree. While I too understand that fraud must be pled with particularity, I have a hard time seeing dismissal of a count that identifies the sale of a T210 Joe Jackson at a certain date and price to a "prominent collector". Can't see the Defendant (or counter-defendant here) arguing to the judge with a straight face that he doesn't know what transaction is at issue.

[Kenny Cole]

Todd,

You go ahead and take that risk. I think I'll plead everything I think I know so that if I draw a judge who thinks the "who" is important, I've given him the information. I'm sort of a better safe than sorry guy.

Kenny

[calvindog]

....especially after the Court had ordered the pleadings to include more particulars.....

[tbob]

I was sorry to see Pete Calderon's name pop up in the article. Damn shame, Pete's a really nice guy who has brought a lot to the hobby and has been very personable and kind.