Comments on: September 28 roundup https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Wed, 30 Sep 2009 02:44:25 +0000 hourly 1 By: wfjag https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-72138 Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:41:38 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=13898#comment-72138 RE: ACORN suit:
1. The Complaint lists the lawyers as “Attorneys for Plaintiffs” — which makes it look like the same attorneys are representing both ACORN and the 2 former attorneys that ACORN fired. Does the phrase “conflict of interest” ring any bells?

2. The Complaint pleads complete diversity of citizenship. Wonder if Plaintiffs’ attorneys considered effects of removal?

3. Maryland has an Anti-SLAPP statute. It’s pretty narrow, but looks like it may cover this suit, especially if Defendants raise First Amendment issues.

4. ACORN isn’t authorized to do business in Maryland and didn’t pay its corporate taxes. That’s always a good point with the jury for a plaintiff.

5. I’m still trying to figure out the theory of the case for the former ACORN employees. Is it “we’re feeling distressed because co-plaintiff ACORN fired us for what we did”, or is it “we’re feeling distressed because Defendants accurately reported our willingness to engage in multiple criminal conspiracies” ?

]]> By: Robert https://www.overlawyered.com/2009/09/september-28-roundup/comment-page-1/#comment-72128 Mon, 28 Sep 2009 05:53:35 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=13898#comment-72128 The first thing that Massachsetts Dunkin’ Donuts should have done is reported that “mother” to Child Protective Services. Give her back a taste of her own medicine.

]]>