On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:39:21 -0700, Richard Riley
wrote:

On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:24:50 -0500, "Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired"
wrote:

: http://www.sportpilot.org/news/050331_powrachute.html
:
: Ron Wanttaja
:I must have missed something, what's his beef with Powrachute?


My assumption (and it's just an assumption) it that it's Standard Zoom
Business Tactic #1 - get them to run some ads, when the contract runs
out keep running the ads, bill the company, sue when they don't pay.

Complicating this one is the fact that Powrachute was sold to new owners just
before Zoom filed his suit:

http://www.eaa.org/communications/ea...owrachute.html

Wouldn't THAT have been a pleasant surprise...getting served at their first air
show?

One can imagine their problems in trying to defend something like this. They
may just settle and then try to get the money back from the previous owner. The
new cases were filed in Circuit Court, which means the claimed damages are
greater than $15,000.

For the trading card collectors out there, Zoom's attorney in the two new cases
is the same one as in his SnF lawsuit. The previous suits, against Pulsar and
RAF, had a different attorney. They were in County court and were for quite a
bit less.

Ron Wanttaja