Alan vs. KJ

[MisterV]

There will be no defamation suit, because there is no defamation. That is just something Alan threatens all the time when his feelings are hurt.

Bingo.

To quote the Bard: "it is a tale ... full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

[redietz]

let's take this to it's illogical conclusion.

I agree that your scenario and conclusion is illogical.

Alan wrote "You continue to libel me. Your intent is to damage me. If I knew your real name I'd sue you."

As an award-winning veteran newsman, he likely has experience in matters of libel and defamation.

He seems pretty sure that what you've written about him is actionable.

An attorney can help him determine your real name, if it hasn't already been provided by your fan club.

Once he's discovered your real name, then it sounds like he intends to sue you.

Your housemates won't prevent that, they'll likely be named in the complaint as "john does", and will be deposed in discovery as well.

If he starts a GFM campaign, I'll be sure to post the link as soon as I know it, and you can contribute.

But, you'll need to make separate arrangements for your defense, and that of your housemates.

Actually, this is incorrect on almost all fronts.

If Alan thought he had a case, he'd just sue him. Announcing it on the forum in advance doesn't aid anything. It's an action (threatening to sue) with a desired reaction (kewlJ backs off from future forum posting regarding Alan's gambling propensities and history). It doesn't solve what's already been posted. And it gives kewlJ a heads up, which means he gets extra time to seek out legal counsel of his choice and gives that counsel more time to prep. If Alan were going to sue, it's the exact wrong thing to do. Plus, declaring that you are going to sue reduces the likelihood that further allegedly defamatory remarks would be made, which can't be helpful.

MrV, did I miss anything?

Don't thank me, I loved Perry Mason when I was eight or nine. I didn't always know what was going on, but I was a big fan.

[MisterV]

KJ and redietz are both on the right track in their analysis.

This sort of reminds me of the story about a boy who cried wolf.

[Garnabby]

Announcing it on the forum in advance doesn't aid anything. It's an action (threatening to sue) with a desired reaction (kewlJ backs off from future forum posting regarding Alan's gambling propensities and history). It doesn't solve what's already been posted. And it gives kewlJ a heads up, which means he gets extra time to seek out legal counsel of his choice and gives that counsel more time to prep. If Alan were going to sue, it's the exact wrong thing to do. Plus, declaring that you are going to sue reduces the likelihood that further allegedly defamatory remarks would be made, which can't be helpful.

You're supposed to send a letter to ask that the defamation stop. To try to mitigate things before suing.

How you guys think court works, compared to how it actually works, are two different things. There's no such rationale to it.

[coach belly]

It's an action (threatening to sue) with a desired reaction (kewlJ backs off from future forum posting regarding Alan's gambling propensities and history).

You are likely correct.

It doesn't solve what's already been posted.

What's already been posted can't be "solved" (whatever that means).

The issue of damages can be resolved...that typically requires a complaint to be filed.

And it gives kewlJ a heads up, which means he gets extra time to seek out legal counsel of his choice and gives that counsel more time to prep.

That's absurd...whatever extra time you are imagining is insignificant.

There are no "surprise" lawsuits of this nature that would prevent a defendant from acquiring, or their counsel from preparing, an adequate defense.

declaring that you are going to sue reduces the likelihood that further allegedly defamatory remarks would be made

That is correct, and a proper action, since Alan likely prefers that further defamatory remarks not be made.

[coach belly]

You're supposed to send a letter to ask that the defamation stop. To try to mitigate things before suing.

How you guys think court works, compared to how it actually works, are two different things. There's no such rationale to it.

As if you can file a defamation complaint on the DL, that would be heard before the defendant could respond.

[Garnabby]

It's just one of the rules, at least in Canada. Filing a law suit usually takes some time. Alan might want to review everything KJ wrote about him, say, over the last five years. Sure, some judge may throw it all out, but, all of them would want to hear what Alan has to say. Who's to say what Alan would say? As for KJ being "judgment proof", not so if he owns anything, say, his dead husband's house.

[MisterV]

Not sure how things work in Nevada, but in Pac NW you can serve a lawsuit (typically a summons and complaint) without first filing it / paying the filing fee.

Once a person is served they have so many days to respond: typically 20 if they're served in state, 60 if served out of state.

Sometimes a court hearing is scheduled to occur before these timelines expire, e.g. if plaintiff seeks an injunction; a court can also issue an immediate restraining order proscribing certain conduct without any notice to the defendant (typical in divorce cases when case first filed).

If an unfiled lawsuit is served the plaintiff will need to file it if he wants the court to take any action thereon, e.g. enter a default judgment if the necessary time period has passed since service and if the defendant has stupidly failed to appear and / or respond.

The lesson to be learned here boys and girl is do not ignore an unfiled lawsuit if you are served: treat it seriously, because it is legit and needs to be responded to.

[coach belly]

Not sure how things work in Nevada, but in Pac NW you can serve a lawsuit (typically a summons and complaint) without first filing it / paying the filing fee.

Who issues the summons without a filed complaint?

[Garnabby]

Well, all of that varies one way to the opposite in Canada, depending on which court you are in. Small claims (to $35,000) has a normal limitation period of two years after injury. You file it before, and, then, have up to six months to serve it (with proof of service). Longer if, say, the injury isn't known until later. Divisional court, more a part of Superior Court, you have so many days, I think 15, after serving a notice of appeal, to file it with the court. Serve stuff, and, then, file it. The rules of service are so much relaxed. Five days after mailing, if not by the other side's lawyer's email. Court forms are virtually non-existent. You have to have examples of other such suits to see how they did it. Sigh, a lot of different rules depending on which court. I'm involved in Divisional court at the moment.

[kewlJ]

Why on earth does goofy Garnabby think we care about what happens in a third world country like Canada?

[Ozzy]

I actually feel bad for Tomg. I would have been PISSED if my innocent thread about living out of hotels suddenly got closed over that.

If Rusty closes Tom's thread, he can continue it over here. He's a member of this fine site, who hasn't posted in several months.

[mickeycrimm]

Alan is not exactly fully retired. He's still advertising for business on Linkedin and Twitter. He has some very current infomercials. He's also giving tax tips.

[kewlJ]

I actually feel bad for Tomg. I would have been PISSED if my innocent thread about living out of hotels suddenly got closed over that.

If Rusty closes Tom's thread, he can continue it over here. He's a member of this fine site, who hasn't posted in several months.

The thread is only temporarily closed why mods discuss if I need a time out or not. It will reopen.

[kewlJ]

Alan is not exactly fully retired. He's still advertising for business on Linkedin and Twitter. He has some very current infomercials. He's also giving tax tips.

I wonder if he is planning on conducting his business from his casino room? or maybe his car?

[Rob.Singer]

More silliness, and of course, it's between kew & Alan.

First, you cannot "damage" a 70-year-old living alone in a cheap apt. in LV after many failed marriages, where he moved to in order to be closer to the machines that have wreaked all kinds of havoc upon his life throughout many years. His past life of being a journalist/reporter/whatever is over, and if his declining years/end-of-life dream was to pour social security peanuts and a tv pension into the machines in return for constant free cafe meals along with unlimited Martha Stewart place-settings and kitchen gadgets--while being broke the other 20-25 days of the month--then kudos to him for realizing that.

It is entirely possible for any gambler to live full time comped in LV hotels, esp. a vp player. He'd need the bankroll along with a fairly sizeable steady income source of course, because it's a well-known fact, via his own and his son's admission, that he loses nearly everything he has. I've personally witnessed him playing and losing feverishly, then counting and re-counting his remaining funds with the look of sheer terror on his face. So for him to do this would require good planning and an even better strategy.

I don't read WoV and I'm surprised kew is even allowed to post there. It sounds like kew does what he does best on forums: concoct a scenario, this time for Alan....who don't forget, embarrassed the hell out of kew for the invitation to meet at Caesar's to prove the unprovable claim about counting two tables simultaneously.

Forget all this nonsense about libel and lawyers etc. It's nothing but forum hogwash. Why not just leave Alan alone so he can do whatever he chooses to do in his retirement? He's not a bad guy and can be a good friend, at least for a time.

And redietz, please stop with the recanting of how you always seem to have some kind of weird attachment to or history with whatever scenarios pop up on forums.

[kewlJ]

Ut Oh. Looks like Rob has gone and gotten himself added to the defamation lawsuit.

2 points. A player living rent free at casinos in comped rooms and discounted rooms, who is losing thousands a month to get those comps and discounts is NOT living for free. They are paying for those rooms, just in a different manner that I guess makes them feel good. They are.....well Mdawg.

Rob says why not just leave Alan alone. I didn't go about trying to be mean to Alan or get him upset. I just said don't do this. Don't consider or think about or whatever, giving up your home at age 70 and living NOT RENT FREE, at casinos. I am aware there are AP's that do this....usually in their younger years. Alan is neither an AP, nor in his younger years. It is just a terrible, terrible idea for him to even consider based on his gambling history. I am sorry if that hurts his feelings.

[Ozzy]

Come on Rob, you of all people should know Alan is one of the biggest forum punching bags of all time. You beat him to a pulp for many years !

[mickeycrimm]

KJ really went after Alan hard on WoV. It was really uncalled for. Alan asked him to stop so KJ poured it on harder. And per the usual, KJ made shit up. Here's a KJ quote on page 8:

"But when a person says they 'have looked into' giving up their home and possesions to live at casinos so they have more money to gamble, I will always say 'that is a terrible idea" and I am disappointed won't and aren't stepping up voicing that."

Alan never said he looked into it so he would have more money to gamble. That is a fiction/lie made up by KJ. But you know KJ. He always has to pull that shit. KJocchio. He got called out for the lie but in subsequent posts he never acknowledged it. Scumbag.

And then the sentence about other people stepping up. KJ is literally begging other people to pile on Alan.

The bottom line is KJ bitch trolled Alan on purpose and made up a ton of shit in doing it. And all the while feigning concern for Alan's well being. Phoney as a 17 dollar bill.

I think the only question with the mods is suspension or nuke.

[jbjb]

There's enough information on these forums that Alan could make thousands per month and reap the benefits of free rooms.