But it would be cool if Linda could trip on my nads.... he he he ... I couldn't resist.. Chris On Tuesday, August 28, 2001, at 02:24 PM, Eric wrote: > Ok I guess I 'm back in. > > I'm not an expert either. But I don't need to be. This stuff is not > estate > planning or securities regulation. Most of this is pretty basic. > > So if I call qworst and inquire about a DSL package, my call may be > sent to > MT. I start taping, and qworst starts lying. I then rely on > qworst-lies > (because I believed them initially) to my detriment. I receive a bill > with > a charge that was not explained to me by the qworst liar in MT. What > now? > > Sue qworst (I really like saying that) in Arizona small claims court. > That > court would have personal jurisdiction over me and qworst because of > actual > presence in the state, as well as subject matter jurisdiction over the > case > because qworst's behavior is tortious, and is for an amount under $5,000 > let's say. > > Trial day comes and I ambush qworst with an ill-gotten conversation. > qworst > objects because it was illegally obtained and because it is hearsay. > What > principle does the judge use to exclude it? I am not exactlly sure, but > although it could survive the hearsay objection (because a > tape-recording is > not exactly he-said/she-said), I am VERY doubtful that the tape would be > admitted as evidence. This is because it is illegally gained, albeit > only > under MT law, not AZ. I can't cite the specific rule of evidence by > which > it would be excluded, but it just would. > > Even if it was not excluded as evidence in the case you brought, qworst > now > has ammunition to bring their own suit against you. And they could try > to > do it either in MT or AZ. MT, however, may not have personal > jurisdiction > over me bc I have never been there, and did not choose to have my call > go > there. This one is close. But even so, qworst could bring suit > against me > in AZ for violation of MT law. This can be done. I have seen cases > where a > whole bunch of different state laws were broken, but the case was only > brought in one. I have not seen a case like this one where only one > law was > broken, but the case was brought in another. But I don't have that much > experience, so what do I know! I bet it could be done though. > > So now you have qworst by the nads, and they have you. What has this > gotten > you? What's more, the evidence you have may be excluded by the Arizona > small-claims court because it was illegally obtained. Then you are in a > case where the only one whose nads are had is YOURS. > > And don't forget that we have only been talking about civil law here. > Me v. > Qworst is civil. But violation of wiretap statutes is a crime, at > least in > some states. Remember the prosecutors' in Maryland tried to get the > nads > of Linda Trip for taping her phone calls with 'ole Monica. The only > reason > this prosecution was unsuccessful was because K. Star had granted her > immunity at the federal level for her actions; since fed. law trumps > state, > no prosecution nor no nads could be had. But don't count on Star > saving > your nads in this case. > > bye > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: plug-discuss-admin@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us >> [mailto:plug-discuss-admin@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us]On Behalf Of Chris >> Cowan >> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2001 11:28 AM >> To: plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us >> Subject: Re: Qworst DSL - Liars! >> >> >> I'm totally not an expert, furthermore I'm not a lawyer either... I >> just >> like this discussion. >> >> So... (hypothetically) if it's legal for someone under the age of 16 in >> Montana to call a 900 number. Would it be legal for a 16 year old to >> call (from Arizona) a 900 Number in Montana? >> >> Not that this is exactly the same thing...but we are trying to decide >> which laws take precedent. I'm sure if you filled the complaint in the >> State of Arizona against a business in Arizona who was breaking Arizona >> Laws but doing it through another office in a another state, the case >> would still have precedent in Arizona. >> >> Now if they counter sue you in Montana that will be left up to the >> Montana courts. Can they even counter sue from another venue? I would >> be >> willing to bet that they can only counter from the original state. But >> keep in mind you can sue anyone for anything. It's up to the judge if >> he >> will hear you or not. >> >> From all the T.V. that I've watch usually states don't mix their legal >> battles unless it's a really big deal. >> >> Chris >> ________________________________________________ >> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail >> doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. >> >> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us >> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >> > > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't > post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >