Jump to content

SquishMitten

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    5803
  • Joined

Posts posted by SquishMitten

  1. First, I thought that was illegal. Second, they made the property less valuable… Unless the hotel sale was conditioned on first removing the tree (which would make sense, because any new business wouldn’t want the negative backlash it would get by cutting it down themselves. But most importantly, aren’t there ways to move trees like that? With how much it’s worth, I woulda thought somebody would be happy to do it for free, or at least relatively cheaply. Those people suck.

  2. 20 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

    I'm going toΒ  guess that that is a ruling on a motion to dismiss, which doesn't really consider the validity of the claim except in the most abstract or cursory way.

    Could it conceivably be confusing?Β  Maybe, yeah, ok.

    Is it actually confusing and can anyone demonstrate harm from the "deception"?Β  Β We shall see.

    Completely this (as you know, but responding for others). Judges don’t rule on an MSJ or dismissal like this if there’s 0.01% chance of the other side prevailing. Without digging farther than what was posted by OP, this is a really dumb suit. They could just say β€œhis buddies called him Texas Pete” and that would be the end of it. One of our fellow barristers made this suit happen.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  3. 16 hours ago, The Dog said:

    more context.Β 

    Sure is a lot of public talk about the majority of their force being committed in the south in the near future. It’s one thing to say they’re already fully engaged in those areas, but it’s entirely different to say it’ll be happening over the next few weeks. I’ll be shocked if that’s where they actually attack.Β 

    • Hook 'Em 3
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...