Skip to comments.Open Letter to the Mac Community - (and iPod community)
Posted on 05/23/2006 7:46:11 PM PDT by Swordmaker
The Truth Behind the iPod Nano "Scratch" Class Action Suit
May 22, 2006
Dear Mac Community:
Hello! My name is Jason Tomczak. Many people around the world rightly know me as a mild-mannered techie, photographer, writer, and nature-lover. I am an Apple fan and have been fortunate enough to use Mac computers and other Apple products since about 1985.
On October 19, 2005, my life changed due to the unauthorized conduct of others. From that date forward, countless numbers of people around the world were driven to hate me and slander my name, sometimes using foul and threatening language.
Since October 19, 2005, my name has been infamously tied to the iPod Nano "Scratch" Class Action law suit filed against Apple.
What You Don't Know About The Nano Suit
The truth is that I never sought out nor did I ever hire David P. Meyer & Associates or Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro to represent me in any case, much less the iPod Nano Class Action suit.
The iPod Nano Class Action law suit was initiated by David P. Meyer & Associates Co. LPA of Columbus, Ohio and their representative firm, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP of Seattle, Washington and filed on October 19, 2005.
David P. Meyer & Associates contacted me, soliciting my opinions and comments about the scratching of my iPod Nano after finding Nano-related blog posts I'd written on my own website, on The Unofficial Apple Weblog and on The MacCast. They informed me that they had received an "overwhelming number of complaints" about the Nano and that they wanted my "insight into the problem". Yes, I answered their communication and told them that I had problems with my iPod Nano, however I clearly told them that they should do their own professional and technological study of the iPod Nano.
I emphasized that I did not have any access to any specific data about the materials used in making the iPod Nano. David P. Meyer & Associates used my personal comments and opinions as the basis of the iPod Nano suit. To my knowledge, there was no actual technical study done on the iPod Nano before the Class Action suit was filed.
Additionally, I told David P. Meyer & Associates that I wanted to remain private, and that my wish for privacy, among other considerations, would preclude me from getting involved in the case.
At no time did David P. Meyer & Associates or Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro ever receive any attorney-client agreement form from me. On their own time and based on their own schedules and plans, they prepared the paperwork and filed the iPod Nano Class Action suit in California using my name as Lead Plaintiff, however this was done without my knowledge or consent.
The Filing and The Call
The senior partner of David P. Meyer & Associates and one of his representatives called me during the afternoon of October 21, 2005 to urgently request my signature on an attorney-client agreement - two days after the Class Action suit was filed; two days after they began their action against Apple; two days after the press had begun running the story. They then warned me that my family, friends, clients and I should expect to hear from the media and others interested in the iPod Nano Class Action suit.
During that phone call to me, David P. Meyer and his associate blamed the faulty Nano filing on Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro.
During that week and the following months, my name was posted in relation to the iPod Nano Class Action suit on websites all over the world, even in foreign publications like Russia's "Pravda" newspaper, the Enquirer, Stuff Magazine, Popular Mechanics, CNN, BusinessWeek, MTV, VH1, etc.
Google results for my name skyrocketed. I began getting hate mail from people upset about the iPod Nano suit. I had to take my website down and remove legitimate references to my name on numerous web services. My fiancee and I were afraid to go outside in our own home town for fear of recognition and reprisal.
Call For Help
Given the gravity of the situation I was facing, I had to hire a law firm to protect myself, clear my name and set the record straight. David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, when contacted by my lawyers, did not even offer to correct any of their press releases. Not even an official apology was offered.
Law Firms' Defense Begins
A David P. Meyer & Associates representative contacted my lawyers with a highly suppositional account of what my intentions might have been; that perhaps I had second thoughts or "buyer's remorse" about the suit, etc. They snubbed the fact that David P. Meyer & Associates violated my request for privacy and non-involvement and the fact that neither David P. Meyer & Associates nor Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro ever received a single document or written communication from me agreeing to be any part of the iPod Nano Class Action law suit.
Then David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro each hired professional defense law firms to fight against me. These two powerful law firms hired two highly aggressive defense firms to confront me, a sole individual.
Things Get Very Personal
Their malpractice defense law teams scheduled me for deposition in Los Angeles. During the first day of my deposition, which was scheduled for April 20 and April 21, 2006, David P. Meyer & Associates' and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro's lawyers deposed me for about 6 hours. Were the majority of their questions directly related to the Nano issue? No. They wanted to know details about my family, the personal circumstances of why my parents got divorced, what I thought about their divorce; where I went to grammar school, high school, college, what my majors were; names, locations and ages of family members and a number of other personal topics seemingly unrelated to the Nano issue. The bulk of the questions were, in my personal opinion, invasive, inappropriate, off-topic and an attempt to overwhelm me.
Toward the end of the first day, they bluntly refused to continue the deposition as scheduled. Their abrupt cancellation will likely cost me thousands of dollars in added travel and legal expense, time away from my family and clients and added emotional stress of not being able to find closure on this horrible and sometimes terrifying experience.
A SLAPP In The Face
On May 1, 2006, David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro defense lawyers filed Motions to Strike the entirety of my case against the two firms despite evidence that I had unwillingly and unknowingly been made Lead Plaintiff in the iPod Nano Class Action suit. In their Motions to Strike my case against them, they also requested of the Court that I be held financially responsible for their attorneys' fees and costs.
The defense teams filed "demurrers" against my filings which state, in short, that David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro did, in fact, mistakenly file the iPod Nano Class Action suit with my name, but they claim that they legally had a privilege to mistakenly file documents in my name without culpability or recourse.
They also filed an Anti-SLAPP motion against me and my claims against David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro. The filing of an anti-SLAPP motion prevents me, the plaintiff, from amending my complaint against David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro and delays all discovery. This means that no parties from either firm can be deposed, and possibly incriminating documents cannot be requested of them. Anti-SLAPP motions are like terribly expensive and time-consuming "pause buttons".
Where Do We Go From Here?
I've learned that every day that passes can bring big surprises - though not usually pleasant ones. I am not sure how the iPod Nano Class Action suit will turn out, nor do I know how David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro will continue to act with regard to my request for justice and the return of honor to my name. If recent actions are any indicator, I am preparing for an emotional, stressful and expensive ordeal.
Although it is too late to completely clear my name from the iPod Nano Class Action law suit, by writing this Open Letter to the Mac Community, I am hoping to make an attempt to reduce the damage already caused to my good name and to open people's eyes to the fact that I did not approve, endorse, authorize, initiate or promote the lawsuit against Apple. These actions were taken without my authority and against my express wishes by the law firms of David P. Meyer & Associates and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro.
I am frightfully aware of the fact that issuing this letter could possibly spur an even more aggressive legal attack against me as they apparently wish to suppress the truth and wish to suppress me. Whatever the outcome, whether I am successful or I am financially crippled by David P. Meyer & Associates' and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro's defense firms, it is my sole intent to communicate the truth of what happened so that I can begin to find some peace of mind after the hate, harassment and embarrassment brought about by the misuse of my name in the iPod Nano suit.
c/o Cameron Totten
Sherman & Nathanson
9454 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 820
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
I wonder what happens to the standing in this case. Will the court toss it because of a lack of standing?
LEAD PLAINTIFF IN iPOD CLASS ACTION "SCRATCH SUIT" NEVER HIRED LAW FIRM!
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
You have to see this... iPod PING!
I'm sure he'll be able to find some jackals willing to sue the other jackals for using him to sue Apple...
With those federal indictments against Milberg Weiss last week, those crooked class action boutique law firms might want to reconsider their tactics.
|Send FReepmail if you want on/off iPing list
WARNING: This is a high-volume Ping list. Turn your headphones down
|The List of Ping Lists|
Word: never screw with Scientologists, MacHeads or cat lovers.
Now I can agree on the other two...
Apple has some skin in this game, it seems to me that they should be helping out.
Someone filed a suit against Apple because their screen scratched? is that all or am I missing something?
While I always want to wait to hear the other side of the story before passing judgement, I also think that western civilization should have heeded Shakespeare's famous advice regarding lawyers.....
While the attorneys in question are without a doubt some of the lowest of the low, those who have taken the lawsuit so personally as to threaten and harass the hijacked plaintiff represent a sad breed who would violate basic civil behavior over the "honor" of a piece of plastic or a company that doesn't even know they exist.
I wish him all the best as he tries to untangle this rat's nest.
At this point they can't... he is the putative plaintiff in a lawsuit against them... they cannot contact him directly; they have to contact the attornies of record in the case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.