ZZZooommm rant latest

"B2431" wrote in message
...

Read it again, Juan, he didn't say he didn't know what the signs were
about, he
simply said he doesn't recall seeing Jim Campbell's name on the signs.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Same thing.

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's merit.

And I'm saying that that is not correct. Settling out of court can VERY MUCH
say a LOT about a case's merit, depending on the circumstances.

Remember, cases get settled out of court because the plaintiff gets a
guaranteed payout instead of rolling the dice and possibly getting
nothing.

It is very naive to assume that that's the only reason why cases get settled
out of court. And don't tell me that that's not what you're saying. If you
want to rephrase, fine, but in this sentence you are saying that that is the
only reason why cases are settled, and that's an incorrect statement.

I'm in favor of capital punishment for stupid juries... summary judgments,
immediately enforced, no chance for appeals!

Eric (Of course, I feel the same way about parking tickets and jaywalking
)

shrug Let's hope you don't get stuck with jury duty and an immediate
sentence.

Juan

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

Not that it came from nowhere, but that it was covered by insurance
premiums
which may or may not have gone up. Actually, there'd probably be a
deductible.

And pigs flew that night. shrug

The plaintiff made the choice to accept a payment rather than having a
judge
award them: nothing, less, the same, or more.

And the result is the same as if the judge had awarded the money.

No need to be condescending.

It upsets me when people decide to argue points without bothering to read
the few messages in the thread. I'm sure it would upset you too.

Still equates to American failure to accept personal responsibility in my
book. If I slip and fall on the ice, I say "whoops, how clumsy of me", not
"who's
fault is this? who can I sue?"

This wasn't a slip and fall. The allegation was that the design of the UL
was wrong, not that he slipped and fell from the sky.

First, a good reason why kit builders shouldn't offer "ready to fly"
options
unless they go the route of full certification (though I guess even that
offers no protection).

So much for the Sport Pilot initiative...

And lastly, as far as litigation goes... it's always cheaper to kill than
to maim

chuckle

Juan

In article 6z47b.393920$o%2.175789@sccrnsc02, "Juan E Jimenez"
writes:


And let's not forget that the Bankruptcy trustee sued Jim Campbell for
fraud and perjury. Campbell settled out of court. If Juan wants to
believe that accepting an out-of-court settlement is a full admission of
guilt, I ain't sure if I want to disabuse him. :-)

Ron, does Jim state or imply he's never been successfully sued? Simple
question.



Does he post it to Aero-News.Net for the world to see on a repeated basis?

Simple question for a simple mind.



Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In article Cw47b.394183$Ho3.59095@sccrnsc03, "Juan E Jimenez"
writes:


As I mentioned earlier in another post, either quote me entirely or don't
quote
me at all.

To quote your own noises: "No." I decide what to quote, not you.


It figures, it might show just how lame and stupid your responses really are.

Nothing naive about it and if you had included the rest of my post it was
quite
clear.

Wrong again.


OH yes, I did forget, you don't know how to read worth a damn so it probably
wasn't too clear to you. Sorry, I gave you too much credit.

So quit pulling this **** and YOU won't look like such a damn fool. I
know what the signs said and what they were about but also know that out
of the
100's of thousands of attendants at Oskhosh this year not more than a few
dozen
have any clue what-so-ever regarding those signs.

Unhuh. And you interviewed them all to see if they were in the hundreds of
thousands of hits that aero-news.net receives daily during the show.

The only fool here is you, son.

Juan



Once again you show how poorly you read and understand the english language.
Did I mention anywhere how many "hits" that aero-news.net receives daily? Did
anybody even mention it? NO! Try reading again and this time slowly one word
at a time or better yet, let one of you kids read it to you.

And by the way, are you really so stupid regarding web site statistics that you
don't know that "hits" are meaningless? The "hit" count has very little to do
with the number of people who actually visit a site and can be run up by the
way the site is structured. My own site averages over two thousand hits per
day but that only represents about a 100 actual individual visitors. That is
about a 20 to one ratio but I could easily make it a 2000 to one by some minor
changes to the setup. Now go back to school and see if you can do better on
your next try.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH




Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"RobertR237" wrote in message
...

Once again you show how poorly you read and understand the english
language.
Did I mention anywhere how many "hits" that aero-news.net receives daily?

I did. Glad you're learning to read. You now have my permission to take it
back to your sandbox, putz. Your arguments are once again reverting to the
prepubescent level. How predictable.

Juan

"RobertR237" wrote in message
...

Ron, does Jim state or imply he's never been successfully sued? Simple
question.

Does he post it to Aero-News.Net for the world to see on a repeated basis?

Simple question for a simple mind.

Hush. boy. Children should be heard, not seen. When the adults finish
talking we may give you a chance to join in. In the meanwhile, read the
question again. Maybe the second time you'll comprehend it.

Juan E Jimenez wrote:

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's merit.

And I'm saying that that is not correct. Settling out of court can VERY MUCH
say a LOT about a case's merit, depending on the circumstances.


The key word here is "can". Not "does". Sounds like a lot of double-speak.

Oh, I get it, you're following Clinton's Deposition Testimony Model.

"Warren & Nancy" wrote in message
...

Juan E Jimenez wrote:

"Eric Miller" wrote in message
. net...

I didn't say --- all cases settled out of court have no merit.
I did say --- settling out of court says nothing about a case's
merit.

And I'm saying that that is not correct. Settling out of court can VERY
MUCH
say a LOT about a case's merit, depending on the circumstances.

The key word here is "can". Not "does". Sounds like a lot of
double-speak.

"Juan E Jimenez" wrote
"Eric Miller" wrote
Not that it came from nowhere, but that it was covered by insurance
premiums
which may or may not have gone up. Actually, there'd probably be a
deductible.

And pigs flew that night. shrug

But were they licensed or self-certified? :-)

The plaintiff made the choice to accept a payment rather than having a
judge
award them: nothing, less, the same, or more.

And the result is the same as if the judge had awarded the money.

The money spends/cost the same, but since there was no judgment, there's no
ruling on the merits of the case.

As a previous post hinted, it's not a zero-sum game.
Even with a judges ruling, both sides can win and both sides can lose.
Of course, the lawyers always win.

It upsets me when people decide to argue points without bothering to read
the few messages in the thread. I'm sure it would upset you too.

I've read every line of every one of the 146 posts so far... and I don't get
upset that easily (however, I make up for it when I DO get upset )

Still equates to American failure to accept personal responsibility in
my
book. If I slip and fall on the ice, I say "whoops, how clumsy of me",
not
"who's
fault is this? who can I sue?"

This wasn't a slip and fall. The allegation was that the design of the UL
was wrong, not that he slipped and fell from the sky.

*shrug* personal responsibility is personal responsibility.
I don't recall if the case identified the pilot's experience, both total and
in make&model.
That makes more difference than whether it was a "slip and fall" or whether
his leg was torn off and used to beat him over the head.

First, a good reason why kit builders shouldn't offer "ready to fly"
options
unless they go the route of full certification (though I guess even that
offers no protection).

So much for the Sport Pilot initiative...

More pilots and more planes are good.
More lawsuits are bad.
Fortunately, it's not my job to reconcile the two.

Eric