DSE 5 #126 December 23, 2009 if they run their operations as poorly as that press release is written, I'm surprised they're still in business. You can almost hear the gum popping in the mouth of the ditz that wrote it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #127 December 23, 2009 It was our old buddy Ryan-he stopped posting here a while back. Not sure why.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #128 December 23, 2009 Quote It was our old buddy Ryan-he stopped posting here a while back. Not sure why. He still lurks though. He was spotted in court in Nashville on the 15th, along with Chuckie Owens, looking like they lost a huge bet at the racing track. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DSE 5 #129 December 23, 2009 Quote Quote It was our old buddy Ryan-he stopped posting here a while back. Not sure why. He still lurks though. He was spotted in court in Nashville on the 15th, along with Chuckie Owens, looking like they lost a huge bet at the racing track. Well...he may be a very good skydiver, but his writing skills are challenged (at least in this press release). Hiring an educated intern would have produced a better result. Apologies to Ryan. The press release shrieks "Valley Girl" in the way it's written (O m' gaaaaaawwwwwwwdddddd!) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratostar 5 #130 December 23, 2009 Maybe that what it's not removed.... you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alabamaskydiver 0 #131 December 26, 2009 Gone now apparently. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #132 January 26, 2010 FYI: The court has set a date for a "Status Hearing to discuss scheduling of argument" on Feb 2, 2010. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #133 January 26, 2010 What does that mean in laymans english? MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #134 January 26, 2010 I think it means the lawyers get together and tell the judge "I need x many hours for testimony" and then the judge determines when that amount of time can be scheduled. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #135 January 26, 2010 And what are they arguing? not paying the 6.6mil? MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #136 January 26, 2010 QuoteAnd what are they arguing? not paying the 6.6mil? Matt There are several issues of law that are mentioned in court documents. The way I understand it, the gist of it is, that the jury decides issues of fact and the court decides issues of law. There are some outstanding issues of law that needed to be decided upon. The case then is closed after those issues are resolved. Then after that appeals can be made. That is about the depth of my understanding. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #137 January 26, 2010 Ah,OK it is clear as mud. Thanks for the info, I just hope Larry gets his just reward of 6.6mil before the money runs out. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #138 February 19, 2010 Update on this case: Both parties submitted arguments and exhibits to argue to the court this week. The Plaintiff (SDA) says: "For the foregoing reasons, Skydive Arizona respectfully requests that the Court exercise its discretion to increase the award of profits and/or damages in this case. Under the totality of the circumstances, such an increased award is appropriate and necessary to achieve the goals and mandates of the Ninth Circuit in cases like this one. The Court should provide a remedy sufficient to serve the policy of deterrence, and to make the Defendants’ violations of the Lanham Act unprofitable." The Defendants say: "For the foregoing reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter a judgment not withstanding the verdict, or, in the alternative, order a new trial, or order a new trial on the issue of damages, or in the alternative, order a remittitur for acceptance by the Plaintiff of $224,652." A hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 3. The judge will decide the outstanding matters shortly after that hearing. Most of you don't know this, but the jury did not know about the other lawsuits (GA v SR and SR v USPA) and domain name disputes that were in favor of SDA. These facts were not allowed to be presented to the jury because of the potential bias it might have created. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IanHarrop 41 #139 February 19, 2010 QuoteMost of you don't know this, but the jury did not know about the other lawsuits (GA v SR and SR v USPA) and domain name disputes that were in favor of SDA. These facts were not allowed to be presented to the jury because of the potential bias it might have created. Does the judge get to "know" and consider this "knowledge" when deciding the award of damages?"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 1 #140 February 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteMost of you don't know this, but the jury did not know about the other lawsuits (GA v SR and SR v USPA) and domain name disputes that were in favor of SDA. These facts were not allowed to be presented to the jury because of the potential bias it might have created. Does the judge get to "know" and consider this "knowledge" when deciding the award of damages? These are standard post-trial motions, typical of those filed in many civil lawsuits. It is not unusual, in post-trial motions, for plaintiffs to request (among other things) an increase in the jury's damages award ("additur") and defendants to request (among other things) a reduction in the jury's damages award ("remittitur"). I'm presuming the judge probably does know about various facts outside the admitted trial evidence; but most of the time, trial judges decide post-trial motions (including those requesting additur or remittitur) based solely on evidence admitted at trial. (I won't get into the rarer exceptions.) Generally speaking, the "bar" is set pretty high to get post-trial additur or remittitur of a jury's damages award - occasionally it is granted; most of the time it is not. In most US jurisdictions (I don't know Arizona procedure), the filing of post-trial motions is done as a matter of course by all parties because civil procedural rules require that step to be taken (usually by a fairly short deadline following the verdict) in order to preserve issues for possible appeal. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alabamaskydiver 0 #141 February 24, 2010 QuoteUpdate on this case: Both parties submitted arguments and exhibits to argue to the court this week. The Plaintiff (SDA) says: "For the foregoing reasons, Skydive Arizona respectfully requests that the Court exercise its discretion to increase the award of profits and/or damages in this case. Under the totality of the circumstances, such an increased award is appropriate and necessary to achieve the goals and mandates of the Ninth Circuit in cases like this one. The Court should provide a remedy sufficient to serve the policy of deterrence, and to make the Defendants’ violations of the Lanham Act unprofitable." The Defendants say: "For the foregoing reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter a judgment not withstanding the verdict, or, in the alternative, order a new trial, or order a new trial on the issue of damages, or in the alternative, order a remittitur for acceptance by the Plaintiff of $224,652." A hearing is tentatively scheduled for March 3. The judge will decide the outstanding matters shortly after that hearing. Most of you don't know this, but the jury did not know about the other lawsuits (GA v SR and SR v USPA) and domain name disputes that were in favor of SDA. These facts were not allowed to be presented to the jury because of the potential bias it might have created. . It looks like a $224,652 admission of guilt and a plea to make it go away. But for that sum of money one has to wonder is the money drying up at SR? I am seeing where some of the TN staff is applying to work at other DZ's this year and not Waverly, wasn't this their 'new home', 'staying forever' blah blah blah? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #142 March 4, 2010 I hear there was another court appearance this week and Cary Quattrocchi got slammed again! Can anybody share the details? Jan? "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 27 #143 March 4, 2010 QuoteI hear ... Liar.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #144 March 4, 2010 Quote Quote I hear ... Liar. Fine, I was TOLD in a TEXT message.... Happy now? "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #145 March 4, 2010 classic rem Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MakeItHappen 15 #146 March 5, 2010 QuoteI hear .............. Hey Billy, listen to me........ Yeah SR did not fair well yesterday. When the defense attorney objects to his exhibits- exhibits produced by SR, being entered then you know there is a problem. I'm still writing my account for my journal. I promised Blue Skies an article too. We still have to wait for the judge to rule. But overall, SDA had a very good day in court and SR was, well, so dysfunctional it was comical. I was on the stand for about an hour. .. Make It Happen Parachute History DiveMaker Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #147 March 5, 2010 Quote I was on the stand for about an hour. . Did ya legs get tired?You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #148 March 5, 2010 Quote Quote I hear .............. Hey Billy, listen to me........ Yeah SR did not fair well yesterday. When the defense attorney objects to his exhibits- exhibits produced by SR, being entered then you know there is a problem. I'm still writing my account for my journal. I promised Blue Skies an article too. We still have to wait for the judge to rule. But overall, SDA had a very good day in court and SR was, well, so dysfunctional it was comical. I was on the stand for about an hour. . They must have cheap lawyers right out of school or something. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CSpenceFLY 1 #149 March 5, 2010 They have the best lawyers you can get when you don't pay your lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jumpdude 0 #150 March 5, 2010 Quote Quote Quote I hear .............. Hey Billy, listen to me........ Yeah SR did not fair well yesterday. When the defense attorney objects to his exhibits- exhibits produced by SR, being entered then you know there is a problem. I'm still writing my account for my journal. I promised Blue Skies an article too. We still have to wait for the judge to rule. But overall, SDA had a very good day in court and SR was, well, so dysfunctional it was comical. I was on the stand for about an hour. . They must have cheap lawyers right out of school or something. Yep, probably the same one they had in Nashville.Refuse to Lose!!! Failure is NOT an option! 1800skyrideripoff.com Nashvilleskydiving.org Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
