What's new

US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trying to harm a minority and not living up to your agreements are expensive endeavors.


I was really asking nic if he was expecting a Thank You note for the west attorneys, but I can have a laugh at our side. I like his sense of humor, sometimes.

Seems to me that filing premature DFR suits is expensive too, and you get to pay both attorneys! Thanks!

A lot of guys out there like that Leonidas name even though he and most of his followers were wiped out.
 
This will be laughed right out of court faster than that bogus Rico case. Any of you WELL versed easties care to place a bet with me on this for an expensive dinner say Mortons or some place on that level????
My thoughts exacly. As I was reading the complaint all I could think of was why didn't the cactus 18 file one of these against Seham. He laid out the reason right here.

2. Bad faith attempt to pursue claims already dismissed.
3. The un-cured pleading is presented for an improper purpose: to harass and to needlessly increase the cost of litigation in violation of Rule 11( B )(1).

That is exactly what usapa did by filing their failed RICO suit.

When an attorney files a pleading she or he certifies that, “to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, – (1) [the pleading] is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation; [and] (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a non-frivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law ...” Fed. R. Civ. P. 11( B )(1)-(2).

That was the only reason for filing the RICO suit to harass and cost the west pilots money.

Courts reviewing a motion for sanctions under Rule 11 apply a reasonable inquiry test, which is “meant to assist courts in discovering whether an attorney, after conducting an objectively reasonable inquiry into the facts and law, would have found the complaint to be well-founded.”
The RICO case was dismissed with prejudice. The court found the complaint not to be well founded.

A showing of bad faith may justify sanctions under Rule 11, but it is not required. When a complaint (or claim) is at issue, “a district court must conduct a two prong inquiry to determine (1) whether the complaint is legally or factually baseless from an objective perspective, and (2) if the attorney has conducted a reasonable and competent inquiry before signing and filing it.”

(The “central purpose of Rule 11 is to deter baseless filings in the district court and streamline the administration and procedure of the federal courts.”). This Court has jurisdiction to impose sanctions upon any party, or its counsel, who has presented papers to it even where the Court determines that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Willy v. Coastal Corp., 503 U.S. 131 (1992); Orange Prod. Credit Ass’n v. Frontline Ventures, Ltd., 792 F.2d 797, 801 (9th Cir. 1986).8 This is true even of the sanction of dismissal with prejudice. In re Exxon Valdez, 102 F.3d 429, 431 (9th Cir. 1996); Caribbean Broadcasting Sys. v. Cable & Wireless PLC, 148 F.3d 1080, 1091 (D.C. Cir. 1998).

Dismissal with prejudice. This Rule 11 thing was designed to be used against usapa and Seham in the RICO case. Wonder if it can still be filed?
 
A lot of guys out there like that Leonidas name even though he and most of his followers were wiped out.
Ahh, did the Spartans lose the war? We disagree on the dfr, it served us well. The statue of limitations is no longer a concern, and the discovery is done and paid for.
 
You have to be kidding, right? You are the King of that!

Ok, prove it. Count up how many times I've started it vs the number of times I've been accused/slandered/called names/etc first. Otherwise I think I'll bestow on you the crown nycbusdriver bestowed on me - KOAT (knower of all things) since you seem to think you're perfect while everyone who disagrees or uses words you don't like is scum. Maybe you could even start your own forum where you can kick out anyone who upsets your delicate sensibilities.

Jim
 
Ahh, did the Spartans lose the war? We disagree on the dfr, it served us well. The statue of limitations is no longer a concern, and the discovery is done and paid for.

The WAR? I'll be honest, I'll have to go review. I know they won some battles after Thermopylae, but it went on for a long time didn't it. If I feel like studying it I will get back to you. So, was the name picked because Ferguson and the Addington plaintiffs were willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of the west pilots? I think I would have gone with a name like "Churchill", or "Patton", but Leonidas is better than the "Power Rangers"!
 
Ok, prove it. Count up how many times I've started it vs the number of times I've been accused/slandered/called names/etc first. Otherwise I think I'll bestow on you the crown nycbusdriver bestowed on me - KOAT (knower of all things) since you seem to think you're perfect while everyone who disagrees or uses words you don't like is scum. Maybe you could even start your own forum where you can kick out anyone who upsets your delicate sensibilities.

Jim

How many times have you told me what I think? My feelings about DOH? Ring a bell?

You didn't offend my sensibilities, but I sure seemed to get to yours, didn't I?
 
I was really asking nic if he was expecting a Thank You note for the west attorneys, but I can have a laugh at our side. I like his sense of humor, sometimes.

Seems to me that filing premature DFR suits is expensive too, and you get to pay both attorneys! Thanks!

A lot of guys out there like that Leonidas name even though he and most of his followers were wiped out.

You just keep missing it and now I know its on purpose. DFR = rights protected and no statue of limitation issues. Now just wait on ripeness or better the DJ will bring the end you seek however not the answer you want.

AWA320
 
How many times have you told me what I think? My feelings about DOH? Ring a bell?

I only know what you write, I can't read your mind. As for the method of seniority integration it sure seems like there are only two options for a judge to choose from - the Nic and USAPA's DOH with slanted C&R's. You've said that you don't think DOH nor the Nic is fair, but those are the choices you have to pick from. All proposals for something in between those two is good idle fantising, but will have no bearing on the outcome and you seem to favor USAPA's proposal over the Nic.

You didn't offend my sensibilities, but I sure seemed to get to yours, didn't I?

I'll admit that I do get tired of all the BS thrown at me and can't always resist replying in kind. You certainly don't seem to hold back on pointing out what you don't like in posts - am I to be held to a higher standard than you hold yourself?

Jim

ps - still no proof that I'm the King of anything?
 
Hey Driver,

Does the above imply what one brings to the table equipment wise or pilot wise?

It implies that everybody wants something.

Empire pilots want their commuter DOH and Shuttle pilots wants their Eastern DOH (even though they didn't even ASK for it during arbitration).

Everybody wants something someone else has. That's how ALL wars start.

Driver <_<
 
I mostly agree, A320 Driver. Unfortunately, the only question that matters to too many pilots when a merger looms is "What can I get out of this".

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top