[conclusions]

I don't care how it's spelled. What I want to know is if it is contagious?

The discussion was about YOU calling DOT, not whether TRA/NAR did.

"What a maroon" - Bugs Bunny

Bob

ONE suit?

Borger v. Murphy , Pa. Super., 797 A.2d 309 (2002) Plaintiff appealed an order transferring venue of this medical malpractice action from Philadelphia County to Lehigh County on the eve of trial. Defendant did not claim that venue was improper, but instead that it was inconvenient in Philadelphia County. In affirming the transfer to Lehigh County, the Superior Court notes:

1. The decision of the trial judge on a transfer of venue will not be disturbed absent abuse of discretion.
2. Defendant must establish that the chosen forum is oppressive or vexatious. It is not sufficient to establish that the chosen forum has no significant contact with the claim or that another forum would be more convenient.
3. The defendant physicians in this case established that the extensive commute from Lehigh County to Philadelphia County would disrupt their medical practices and prevent them from seeing patients before and after court time. Defendant physicians also established that employees in their offices would face similar disruptions of their work schedules.

Q. What is a vexatious litigant?

A. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 391(b), a vexatious litigant means a person who does any of the following:

(1) In the immediately preceding seven-year period has commenced, prosecuted, or maintained in propria persona at least five litigations other than in a small claims court that have been (i) finally determined adversely to the person or (ii) unjustifiably permitted to remain pending at least two years without having been brought to trial or hearing.

NO.

(2) After a litigation has been finally determined against the person, repeatedly relitigates or attempts to relitigate, in propria persona, either (i) the validity of the determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined or (ii) the cause of action, claim, controversy, or any of the issues of fact or law, determined or concluded by the final determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined.

NO.

(3) In any litigation while acting in propria persona, repeatedly files unmeritorious motions, pleadings, or other papers, conducts unnecessary discovery, or engages in other tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.

NO.

(4) Has previously been declared to be a vexatious litigant by any state or federal court of record in any action or proceeding based upon the same or substantially similar facts, transaction, or occurrence.

NO.

So it would seem the very request for vexatious litigant status was unmeritorius. Looks like a lawyer should sue the lawyer for ethical breaches.

Interesting, why can't I seem to find the original post of the data from Jay?

Bob

there is a directive you can include in a message that inhibits archiving

from

:

"Google supports the 'X-No-archive: yes' header, and we will not archive any articles that contain this text either in the header or in the first line of the message body."

that directive may have been set in his original message

- iz

baDBob wrote:

Me?? Why would I, and how did the discussion go to that from what TRA/NAR may have done???

No, "vexatious litigants" I think, is from Shakespeare, kind of like "meddlesome priest." ; )

Randy

I would guess the reason is Jerry's "colorful history" in the motor business, which you don't see discussed much in r.m.r because he threatens to sue anyone who does so.

Scott Orr

You would "guess wrong".

It is anti-competition behavior pure and simple. The variety of methods are colorful as well as the variety of involved personalities, but the process and result are dead simple.

Kill competition at all cost, including bringing authorities to the party, zero motor availability in wide swaths of the industry during an outage by the only vendor, or even internal club criminalization and regulation of the industry.

"Whatever it takes."

Don't believe me? It's all on rmr for the reading. Forever.

Just in case I go to a launch and it turns into a dogpile (again).

Jerry

That doesn't make them immune to lawsuits for being the certifying agency. Not in todays sawsuit industry. A smart organization would make sure 100% of their testing is beyond reproach. A stupid organization would not.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Jerry, I've got a humble suggestion for you: since there are people in this world who believe that you can't be trust to make motors, and since many of those people seem to be in important positions in NAR and TRA, maybe you could win over more of your detractors by admitting that mistakes may have been made in the past, and convincing them that you've changed your spots (I mean, you do have a lot of people singing your praises now about your motors). The alternative--to insist that you've never done anything wrong, and are simply being persecuted--is not likely to work as long as there are all stories floating around about your past exploits.

But hey, to be honest, I don't do HPR, so I don't really care--it's your business, and your life.

Scott Orr

The smartest thing to do would be to get the whole thing done by someone else under some name that wasn't connected with USR or Jerry. Have Ross or Ken or Tom or someone submit all the paperwork and get them NAR certified. Then you can resell them under your name. And neither the NAR or TRA can stop you.

Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Tried that too. 4 times 4 different "accepted" people.

Jerry

This is pure BS. If the cert rules were designed to "kill competition", there would be no competition. But that's not the case, is it? No, there are currently FOUR manufacturers of APCP motors and who knows how many hybrid manufacturers. If that's the result of "killing competition", the killers are doing a piss-poor job of it.

Point to the LMR competition please Ray.

They "killed" about 15 willing APCP manufacturers. And cockblcked about

15 more ready in the wings today. I know you don't see them so you do not believe me. Or worse you do not care because they have not received illegal ATF permits or gotten EX nunmbers "in the BRAND name". I have heard it all before ad nauseum.

Jerry