The Lawsuit Continues., This is where we are, and what is happening. Options

[Pickle]

Yet Gailon told Danny exactly what would happen if he filed suit. If that was the plan, I think it was a desperate one.

[SoulEspresso]

Yet Gailon told Danny exactly what would happen if he filed suit. If that was the plan, I think it was a desperate one.

People tend to think other people think like they do. If Danny was bluffing, he might have thought Gailon was too. I don't know if this is the case though.

[Observer]

People tend to think other people think like they do. If Danny was bluffing, he might have thought Gailon was too. I don't know if this is the case though.

My thoughts:

Danny is not legally sophisticated. He thought that he would win.

The 3-ABN Board believed that they had an accurate picture of what would happen and thought that they would win.

THe 3-ABN lawyers had been assured, as had beeen the Board, that certain alligations simply were not true and believed that flexing a bit of legal muscle would result in victory for their side.

Now people have a dose of reality:

It is going to be a long battle, with trial scheduled for 2009.

The discovery process is going to generate a lot of billable hours with an expectation that it will not be a pleasant process.

Minor battles, with major impact have already been lost. The process will be open, not secret, and the unfolding public record will not be pleasant.

This publicity my bring about a continued decrease in offerings.

The continued litigation may result in a decreased lack of confidence in 3-ABN that can never be recovered.

Total victory is not asssured. The best that can be assumed is likely to include some loss.

A potential exists for continued litigation to place the law firm, 3-ABN, and individuals at financial risk.

The cost of the continued litigation will greatly exceed any damages that can be expected to be recovered.

In view of the above, the questions now are:

What is the purpose of this continued litigation?

Is this litigation leading 3-ABN, and certain individuals, into a quagmire from which there is no good recovery?


Answers to all of the above issues:

Only time will tell as no one can predict exactly how it will turn out.

This post has been edited by Observer: Sep 27 2007, 07:02 AM

[Observer]

My thoughts:

Danny is not legally sophisticated. He thought that he would win.

The 3-ABN Board believed that they had an accurate picture of what would happen and thought that they would win.

THe 3-ABN lawyers had been assured, as had beeen the Board, that certain alligations simply were not true and believed that flexing a bit of legal muscle would result in victory for their side.

Now people have a dose of reality:

It is going to be a long battle, with trial scheduled for 2009.

The discovery process is going to generate a lot of billable hours with an expectation that it will not be a pleasant process.

Minor battles, with major impact have already been lost. The process will be open, not secret, and the unfolding public record will not be pleasant.

This publicity my bring about a continued decrease in offerings.

The continued litigation may result in a decreased lack of confidence in 3-ABN that can never be recovered.

Total victory is not asssured. The best that can be assumed is likely to include some loss.

A potential exists for continued litigation to place the law firm, 3-ABN, and individuals at financial risk.

The cost of the continued litigation will greatly exceed any damages that can be expected to be recovered.

In view of the above, the questions now are:

What is the purpose of this continued litigation?

Is this litigation leading 3-ABN, and certain individuals, into a quagmire from which there is no good recovery?
Answers to all of the above issues:

Only time will tell as no one can predict exactly how it will turn out.

My previous post may appear to imply that it would be in the best interest of the plaintiffs to ask the court to dismiss the lawsuit. If so, where are the defendents in this process.

1) No reasonable person who understands the legal process in the United States would ever want litigation to be the prefered method of resolving a dispute. The prefered method would be for the respective parties to resolve their issues without litigation. Litigation is the last choice when the parties likely believe that it is the only means of doing justice to their postion.

2) As the process of litigation develops, the parties often resolve their issues "out of court." But, this only happens under carefully defined circumstances. The major one is typically when each party to the dispute realizes that they will not get everything that they want, and they will likely be able to negotiate more than they could get by the litigation. It is unlikely to happen when one of the parties believes that they can obtain more by litigating than they could get by negotiation. It also does not happen when circumstances lead one party to believe that they are locked into the legal battle, and realisticaly cannot allow the lawsuit to be dismissed.

3) I suggest that the defendents in this lawsuit are in a situation where this lawsuit cannot be easily settled out of court. Neither of the defendents has unlimited resources to obtain the services of lawyers. Yet, lawyers on the side of the defendents are running up billable hours in responding to the motions of the plaintiffs. Those lawyers expect to be paid for their services at some point in time. They expect that payment will come from some place other than the defendents. It is this expectation that will continue this lawsuit. This litigation will not be over until this issue is resolved. The law firm that filed this action has likely initiated an action that will go far beyond what they expected.

This post has been edited by Observer: Sep 27 2007, 07:05 AM

[Observer]

My previous post may appear to imply that it would be in the best interest of the plaintiffs to ask the court to dismiss the lawsuit. If so, where are the defendents in this process.

1) No reasonable person who understands the legal process in the United States would ever want litigation to be the prefered method of resolving a dispute. The prefered method would be for the respective parties to resolve their issues without litigation. Litigation is the last choice when the parties likely believe that it is the only means of doing justice to their postion.

2) As the process of litigation develops, the parties often resolve their issues "out of court." But, this only happens under carefully defined circumstances. The major one is typically when each party to the dispute realizes that they will not get everything that they want, and they will likely be able to negotiate more than they could get by the litigation. It is unlikely to happen when one of the parties believes that they can obtain more by litigating than they could get by negotiation. It also does not happen when circumstances lead one party to believe that they are locked into the legal battle, and realisticaly cannot allow the lawsuit to be dismissed.

3) I suggest that the defendents in this lawsuit are in a situation where this lawsuit cannot be easily settled out of court. Neither of the defendents has unlimited resources to obtain the services of lawyers. Yet, lawyers on the side of the defendents are running up billable hours in responding to the motions of the plaintiffs. Those lawyers expect to be paid for their services at some point in time. They expect that payment will come from some place other than the defendents. It is this expectation that will continue this lawsuit. This litigation will not be over until this issue is resolved. The law firm that filed this action has likely initiated an action that will go far beyond what they expected.

Do I imply that this case cannot be settled in a negotiated, out of court process? Or do I suggest that it can be settled out of court, and if so of what would that settlement consist?

The first issue is financial. If the plaintiffs were to decide that it will ultimately cost them more to persue this lawsuit than it would to settle out of court, that would be a simple business decision. Settle it now.

But, there are issues that are not financial. Both the plaintiffs and the defendents see some of the issues in non-financial terms. They both have wants that cannot be resolved by financial payments. Some of these issues involve the useage of 3-ABN trademarks, and what they claim are false alligations of misconduct. Other issues are seen to require changes in 3-ABN leadership, structure, organization, programing and relationship. The complexity of these isues make it unlikely that they can be resolved by mere financial payments.

This litigation is further complicated by the belief on both sides that God is on their side. When one believes that God is on their side, that side is not likely to negotiate a settlement. After all, the side that God supports will ultimately triumph. If that side loses, it will only be because God allowed it to lose. In other words, ultimately the will of God will be accomplished. Those who believe that God is on their side are unlikely to sin against God by losing faith that God will bring them to victory, by negotiationg a settlement.

In summation: Yes, I believe that in theory it is possible for a negotiated settlement to be reached. But, in reality, I believe that it is unlikely. If that happens, it will only be after this litigation has further developed.


This post has been edited by Observer: Sep 27 2007, 07:08 AM

[Pickle]

If those lawyers thought they really had a case over the use of 3ABN's trademarks, I think they should be fired.

[appletree]

My thoughts:

Danny is not legally sophisticated. He thought that he would win.

No, he thought nothing. That's what attorney's are for. You give them the information of what is happening and they tell you if someone has broken the law, what the case would involve, and what the percentages are for winning.

The 3-ABN Board believed that they had an accurate picture of what would happen and thought that they would win.

Same as above.

THe 3-ABN lawyers had been assured, as had beeen the Board, that certain alligations simply were not true and believed that flexing a bit of legal muscle would result in victory for their side.

Any law firm worth their salt do their own questioning and investigating to determine what is truth and what is not. They did thier homework and their finding prompted them to move forward.

Now people have a dose of reality:

Yes they do...of how Linda's team operates and the repurcussions they are bringing upon themselves.

It is going to be a long battle, with trial scheduled for 2009.

I seriously doubt if it get's that far.

The discovery process is going to generate a lot of billable hours with an expectation that it will not be a pleasant process.

That would be with both sides. Even if Gailon represents himself and files bankruptcy to leave Pickel holding the bag, your team will still be out all kinds of court expenses, legal documents, travel expenses for Pickle and the rest of their friends that will be called into account at the Federal Courts in Ma.

Minor battles, with major impact have already been lost. The process will be open, not secret, and the unfolding public record will not be pleasant.

Battles? Plural? There has been only one motion made period. That was the motion for impoundment which the attorney's were already prepared to lose as a blanket impoundment is almost never granted. However because the Judge denied that motion at this fork in the road does not mean he can't grant an impoundment somewhere else down the road.

This publicity my bring about a continued decrease in offerings.

I believe the opposite is taking place. The more Linda's team put out, the more ridiculous it all seems. (And it is.) The first few accusations, people are like wow is that really gong on? But after months and months of constant garbage, lies, innuendo and speculation it has come to a point where, not only are people tired of the whole thing but they are deciding that the whole this is totally unrealistic. They should have let up early on, and it would be easier to believe.

The continued litigation may result in a decreased lack of confidence in 3-ABN that can never be recovered.

Above answer + what I have seen personally is that the decreased lack of confidence has been aimed towards Linda and her team.

Total victory is not asssured. The best that can be assumed is likely to include some loss.

Again that would be on both sides. Nothing in life is guaranteed.

A potential exists for continued litigation to place the law firm, 3-ABN, and individuals at financial risk.

How so? Do you mean the attorney's bills would put 3ABN at risk? You know that's not possible since they are not paying their own attorney bills.
If you mean they would be at risk because Linda's team might win some damages....please...are you confused about who is suing who? Last I heard the courts don't reward people that are guilty of breaking the laws of copyright and slander.

The cost of the continued litigation will greatly exceed any damages that can be expected to be recovered.

3ABN isn't worried about damages. I mean why would they think they would win damages when Joy filed bankruptcy and Pickle is too busy bashing 3abn to maintain a "real" job. I could be wrong but I will guess that 3abn will request retractions and apologies all around.

In view of the above, the questions now are:

What is the purpose of this continued litigation?

To bring Linda's team to justice. Nothing short of being involved in a Federal Case has been able to make them see the error of their ways.

Is this litigation leading 3-ABN, and certain individuals, into a quagmire from which there is no good recovery?

I imagine. Since as stated earlier, the law firm knows the answers to the accusations and have done their homework on 3abn and were, therefore, more than willing to take the case. When the truth is proven, I'm sure Linda and her team will be wading in quite a quagmire that will result in a loss of trust and their credibility.

Answers to all of the above issues:

Only time will tell as no one can predict exactly how it will turn out.

That I partially agree with. No one can predict 100% on this kind of case but I have quite a strong feeling that I know what the results will be.

[appletree]

Do I imply that this case cannot be settled in a negotiated, out of court process? Or do I suggest that it can be settled out of court, and if so of what would that settlement consist?

The first issue is financial. If the plaintiffs were to decide that it will ultimately cost them more to persue this lawsuit than it would to settle out of court, that would be a simple business decision. Settle it now.

But, there are issues that are not financial. Both the plaintiffs and the defendents see some of the issues in non-financial terms. They both have wants that cannot be resolved by financial payments. Some of these issues involve the useage of 3-ABN trademarks, and what they claim are false alligations of misconduct. Other issues are seen to require changes in 3-ABN leadership, structure, organization, programing and relationship. The complexity of these isues make it unlikely that they can be resolved by mere financial payments.

This litigation is further complicated by the belief on both sides that God is on their side. When one believes that God is on their side, that side is not likely to negotiate a settlement. After all, the side that God supports will ultimately triumph. If that side loses, it will only be because God allowed it to lose. In other words, ultimately the will of God will be accomplished. Those who believe that God is on their side are unlikely to sin against God by losing faith that God will bring them to victory, by negotiationg a settlement.

In summation: Yes, I believe that in theory it is possible for a negotiated settlement to be reached. But, in reality, I believe that it is unlikely. If that happens, it will only be after this litigation has further developed.

For all of your explanations, opinions, and instruction to the rest of us, you still have not gotten the point. There will be NO negotiations on the side of 3ABN. Get with it man....You don't negotiate with kidnappers, terrorists, or Linda's team. I can see it now with all at the mediation table. 3ABNs attorney's say " ok, well, you have hurt the ministry by slander, lies and reporting false information world wide. You have caused people to lose their reputations and credibility without proof to back your accusations up. So let's see.....how's 100,000 sound for your trouble???????

[calvin]

For all of your explanations, opinions, and instruction to the rest of us, you still have not gotten the point. There will be NO negotiations on the side of 3ABN. Get with it man....You don't negotiate with kidnappers, terrorists, or Linda's team. I can see it now with all at the mediation table. 3ABNs attorney's say " ok, well, you have hurt the ministry by slander, lies and reporting false information world wide. You have caused people to lose their reputations and credibility without proof to back your accusations up. So let's see.....how's 100,000 sound for your trouble???????

My bet is that you may very well live to eat those words above. Everything can be negotiated. Often it is not a matter of right or wrong or who is at fault. But from a very practical view both sides could very well decision to settle than to continue pouring money into a case where the come is deemed not to be worth the expenses and effort.

[Delford]

God still sits on His Throne. He knows how hard those at 3ABN work to win souls to the truth. Harvesting was never easy work. But God is still alive and powerful and it only takes one word from Him to stop this bullying from those who want to see 3ABN go down, including Danny. He will step in, just watch and see.

[justice4jesus]

God still sits on His Throne. He knows how hard those at 3ABN work to win souls to the truth. Harvesting was never easy work. But God is still alive and powerful and it only takes one word from Him to stop this bullying from those who want to see 3ABN go down, including Danny. He will step in, just watch and see.

And exactly who is it that wants to see 3ABN go down?

[justice4jesus]

For all of your explanations, opinions, and instruction to the rest of us, you still have not gotten the point. There will be NO negotiations on the side of 3ABN. Get with it man....You don't negotiate with kidnappers, terrorists, or Linda's team. I can see it now with all at the mediation table. 3ABNs attorney's say " ok, well, you have hurt the ministry by slander, lies and reporting false information world wide. You have caused people to lose their reputations and credibility without proof to back your accusations up. So let's see.....how's 100,000 sound for your trouble???????

I'll tell you something, Appletree....your statements could easily be construed as slander. Kidnappers, terrorists and Linda's team? Don't you think that's going just a bit too far?

[ex3ABNemployee]

No, he thought nothing.

Boy, appletree, you're good! Now you know what Danny thought.

[beartrap]

You don't negotiate with kidnappers, terrorists, or Linda's team.

Kidnappers and terrorists? So Bob and Gailon are akin to kidnappers and terrorists now?

[Johann]

God still sits on His Throne. He knows how hard those at 3ABN work to win souls to the truth. Harvesting was never easy work. But God is still alive and powerful and it only takes one word from Him to stop this bullying from those who want to see 3ABN go down, including Danny. He will step in, just watch and see.

Or is there a possibility, Delford, that nobody here wants to see 3ABN go down, but rather feel that those at 3ABN who work so hard at winning souls to the truth, should not be hindered in their great work by liabilities caused by some rather questionable actions by the 3ABN administration which have restrained the flow of income to help advance the proclamation?

This post has been edited by Johann: Oct 1 2007, 12:04 AM