Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cindy]

This is just a head's up to let all know that Judge Saylor issued his order yesterday. You can go to the other forum to read the posts and the uploaded document if you wish.

Or-- As it is against the rules here for me to name that forum or link to it in a post here, and I haven't been able to upload documents here for quite some time, perhaps you might ask Pickle to upload it on his website so a link to the document can be provided here for those wishing to read the facts for themselves, or someone else could upload it here?? 

Have a good day all



..ian


edit: corrected typo in post title


EDIT NOTE:  Edited to remove miniscule type size from edit note.  Ian, it is not necessary for you to make your reasons for editing so small that they are difficult to read.

[Cindy]

In addition, as I just noticed that the Appellee brief filed by 3abn on March 27 has not been provided on Pickles's 3abnvjoy website yet either...

It is also available in the Pacer subforum of the other forum for those wishing to read it.

The topic title is "U.S. Court of Appeals Case"

[Stan]

Now I am curious, and am wondering what 3ABN had offered Pickle to settle for before the last hearing.

[Bob Pickle]

Only got one offer to settle, and it was verbal only on October 17, 2008. During that conversation Simpson explicitly said that he would not file a motion to dismiss, which he did anyway on October 23.

[Cindy]

Only got one offer to settle, and it was verbal only on October 17, 2008. During that conversation Simpson explicitly said that he would not file a motion to dismiss, which he did anyway on October 23.

First, of course you didn't explain what the terms and conditions were as asked...

Second, If your claim is true and you were interested in settling that would seem to explain that statement.

If on the otherhand, as he testified, you and Joy weren't interested in settling things ( even though you repetitively posted asking us to all intercede and get DS an 3abn to drop the "ungodly" and "frivolous" lawsuit), and just kept moving ahead with that lawsuit, that would have changed things after that imo...

This has already been quoted here once. I know I read it. Was there something about it you didn't understand? It seemed very plain to me....

MR. PICKLE: And, your Honor, this is Bob Pickle
again.

Attorney Simpson told me on Friday, the 17th -- well,
he called me up and made a settlement proposal, and one thing
he said was that if we didn't agree, you know, to settle, that
one thing that the plaintiffs could do is to file a motion to
dismiss, and it would be just kind of automatic, and there
wouldn't be anything further we could do about it. So, I point
blank asked him, Are you going to file a -- a motion to
dismiss? And he told me no. And then six days later, he went
ahead and filed it, and it just took us by surprise.
In our opinion, he didn't follow -- and he never
talked to Mr. Joy about it at all. In our opinion, he did not
comply with local Rule 7.1.



MR. SIMPSON: May I address that, your Honor?
THE COURT: Very -- very briefly, yes.
MR. SIMPSON: Just, it's a certain Alice in Wonderland
quality to this whole litigation and hearing my conversations
with Mr. Pickle translated back to you, your Honor, that's not
at all what the conversation was like.

  I read the rule to Mr. Pickle, Rule 41, including the
terms and conditions, and we discussed whether there was any
possible -- possible basis on which they would agree to the
dismissal of the lawsuit. He said that he would speak with Mr.
Joy over the weekend, get back to me on Monday, if there was an
interest; and he didn't get back to me and continued to move
forward with the lawsuit.

THE COURT: All right. All right.
MR. SIMPSON: So that's -- that's all I want to say.
THE COURT: Okay. I've heard enough. My order will
issue.

[Bob Pickle]

Cindy,

What about the matter don't you understand? Feel free to ask questions if you truly need a point clarified.

Notice that Simpson never denied telling me that he said he wouldn't file a motion to dismiss. And the context of his telling me that was if we didn't agree to the terms he was proposing.

[anyman]

Well, I wonder, has there ever been an individual who changed their mind? How about over the course of six day?

Possible scenario: On the day that the phone call Robert keeps alluding to occured, there was no plan to file a voluntary motion to dismiss. However, as a result of the failure to respond by Gailon Joy and Robert Pickle, the plaintiffs and their attorney changed strategy and six days later filed the motion to voluntarily dismiss. Thus,  Robert's continued insinuations and claims that Atty. Simpson lied to him are foundationless liable.

- anyman

Cindy,

What about the matter don't you understand? Feel free to ask questions if you truly need a point clarified.

Notice that Simpson never denied telling me that he said he wouldn't file a motion to dismiss. And the context of his telling me that was if we didn't agree to the terms he was proposing.

[anyman]

Let us take a closer look at the exchange on the record and Roberts commentary:

Simpson: "... that's not at all what the conversation was like."

Pickle's commentary: "Notice that Simpson never denied telling me that he said he wouldn't file a motion to dismiss? And the context of his telling me that was if we didn't agree to the terms he was proposing."

Simpson: "I read the rule to Mr. Pickle, Rule 41, including the terms and conditions, and we discussed whether there was any possible - - possible basis on which they would agree to the dismissal of the lawsuit. He said he would speak with Mr. Joy over the weekend, get back to me on Monday, if there was an interest; and he didn't get back to me and continued to move forward with the lawsuit."

Notice that Robert never denied the truthfulness of Atty. Simpson's statement to Judge Saylor, "... That's not at all what the conversation was like."

Notice that Robert never denied telling Atty. Simpson he would discuss the matter with Gailon Joy over the weekend to see if there was an interest in settling and Robert does not deny faili g to get back to Atty. Simpson with an answer on Monday.

- anyman

[Cindy]

Well, I wonder, has there ever been an individual who changed their mind? How about over the course of six day?

Possible scenario: On the day that the phone call Robert keeps alluding to occured, there was no plan to file a voluntary motion to dismiss. However, as a result of the failure to respond by Gailon Joy and Robert Pickle, the plaintiffs and their attorney changed strategy and six days later filed the motion to voluntarily dismiss. Thus,  Robert's continued insinuations and claims that Atty. Simpson lied to him are foundationless liable.

- anyman

Smile. That's how I see it. 3abn first tried to settle with Pickle and Joy as that is the right thing to do.

Then when Pickle and Joy demonstrated they didn't want to do that and weren't interested in doing so. (both by their failure to reply on Monday or for days after that, and by their actions in proceeding with the lawsuit) 3abn, via their attorneys, had to change their strategy and filed the motion to dismiss.

That seems very understandable and reasonable to me, but I wonder how many posting here ( including Robert Pickle) will ever consider, much less admit, that?

[GRAT]

"as that is the right thing to do.' Quote from Ian.   The right thing to do would have been for 3abm not to sue their brothers in the first place!!!!!!

[Daryl Fawcett]

Here is the document that Ian was posting about here.

[Bob Pickle]

anyman,

I have never been able to recall Simpson reading me Rule 41.

I do recall him saying that if we didn't agree with their terms, they could just file a motion to dismiss, and there wouldn't be anything we could do about it.

Whether I told him that I would definitely get back to him on Monday, I do not recall. But I do know that he told me that he would separately confer with Gailon, and it was only after I told him that I would talk it all over with Gailon that he asked me to talk with Gailon instead of him doing it himself.

Ian,

3ABN and Danny via Simpson never really got serious about settling. I specifically spoke with Simpson about the necessity of a settlement being based on biblical principles, but Simpson wasn't interested.

[Bob Pickle]

So, did Simpson simply change his mind? No.

Simpson told me on Oct. 17 that he wouldn't file a motion to dismiss. On Oct. 22 Simpson told the court in southern Illinois about the next production of documents, which was due Oct. 27.

However, by the end of Oct. 23, Simpson said that he wouldn't be producing a thing on the 27th since he had filed his motion to dismiss.

Did Simpson know that during the hearing on the 22nd? Yes. Thompson's affidavit filed with the motion to dismiss is dated the 22nd, and it says that the board ordered the attorneys to dismiss the case the week of Oct. 12.

Therefore, not only was Simpson not a man of his word by breaking his promise of Oct. 17, but he also misled the court in southern Illinois by leading the court (and us) to think that he was planning on responding to my requests to produce on Oct. 27.

There are other examples. Simpson told me that the scope of discovery issue had pretty much been resolved, but he led the court in southern Illinois to think otherwise. Simpson told me that he had a mind to pretty much let us have the auditor's records, but you would never have known that by looking at the transcript from southern Illinois.

Looking back at it all, I think Simpson was trying to act real friendly, leading me on, till he could pull a fast one on me.

[Murcielago]

Looking back at it all, I think Simpson was trying to act real friendly, leading me on, till he could pull a fast one on me.

Lol! Bob, if you thought you could trust the word of any lawyer under any condition, you are just blonde. Whether they work for 3ABN or anyone else, lawyers are liars. That is a fact of life everyone knows and COUNTS on. Simpson, et al, will lie like an other liar would to make a case.

[tinka]

Looking back at it all, I think Simpson was trying to act real friendly, leading me on, till he could pull a fast one on me.

Lol! Bob, if you thought you could trust the word of any lawyer under any condition, you are just blonde. Whether they work for 3ABN or anyone else, lawyers are liars. That is a fact of life everyone knows and COUNTS on. Simpson, et al, will lie like an other liar would to make a case.

Bob,
George is exactly right about winning with the biggest lies and spin. That is why we did a web site on our own case  as the only way to take one of the most valuable properties in the state was the same trickery. Everything in our case was a lie even from Sec of State. It was proven to the gov office value 44M plus.  I think Bob, if nothing else the sure proof of who is on the right side of things is not DS. He hired the Ill. crooks and it is obvious he will be paying much more then pew money in the end.  The top culprit in our case came from Ill. too. As you know, the first partners we had to cause us other involvement paid dearly from their deceivement to us. This injustice will only have the look of horror for the deceiver. This injustice is so bad that I am sure that our Lord says this one is mine to handle.  Just think how every cover up took money to the lawyers he hired to get the best spin. This alone proves the side of DS.  Corruption!!!  Only when your honest, can you be deceived --as an honest person's mind is not on how to deceive others. We can vouch for that. We have been deceived out of everything!