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
>
(text/plain)