To: AtlasStalled
To: AtlasStalled
...serves no goal other than to move money from (any defendant) to the attorneys coffers. Isn't this the goal of any attorney??
3 posted on
06/13/2012 11:14:03 AM PDT by
Ken522
To: AtlasStalled
Attorneys who do this crap need to have some sort of fine imposed .
4 posted on
06/13/2012 11:21:08 AM PDT by
freeangel
( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like it)
To: AtlasStalled
serves no goal other than to move money from the corporate treasury to the attorneys coffers.
Sounds just like the Agent Orange settlement: lawyers struck gold - VN vets got the shaft.
5 posted on
06/13/2012 11:23:00 AM PDT by
oh8eleven
(RVN '67-'68)
To: AtlasStalled
A rare but welcomed ruling in a bogus lawsuit case. Kudos to Judge Easterbrook for his common sense decision and well-deserved rebuke to the conniving attorneys that instituted this lawsuit with the expectation of reaping a huge windfall in undeserved fees. If only we had more decisions such as this when these bogus lawsuits end up before a judge.
6 posted on
06/13/2012 11:24:14 AM PDT by
Jim Scott
To: AtlasStalled
Who was the idiot District Court judge who let this case start?
7 posted on
06/13/2012 1:37:20 PM PDT by
RicocheT
(Eat the rich only if you're certain it's your last meal)
To: AtlasStalled
What a shame! If this had been allowed to go forward, I bet we could have filled out a three page questionnaire and gotten a coupon for 25 cents off a set of wrenches from Sears if we buy them by November 18, 2012. The lawyers would get 7 million dollars up front, of course.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson