611 replies to this topic

[Ryley]

regardless of the outcome of this lawsuit, it's pretty clear that from here on out any bully can give SA "two for flinchin'" any time they want.

[smackdaddy]

Any new legal docs out on this? I've seen Scot mention a couple of things in his boat-for-sale thread that seemed to imply a decision was coming up.

Just curious.

[jocal505]

Hi SD. MKennedy was a real sport with us but wants sleeping dogs to lie.
But I wonder how it felt to be smacked down by a Boston judge for grifting inside the First Marblehead office. Funny stuff.
I hope the front falls off Numbers.

[smackdaddy]

Cool. Thanks Joc.

[MKennedy]

MKennedy wants sleeping dogs to lie.

+1

[DoRag]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

[isma]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Competition? REMF!

[Navigare]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Competition? REMF!

Being a foreigner and all I can reply with a heartily

[jocal505]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Nez Pas is a wimp. And a dumbass, can't find Seattle, WA.

[Gouvernail]

Any new legal docs out on this? I've seen Scot mention a couple of things in his boat-for-sale thread that seemed to imply a decision was coming up.

Just curious.

Bump...


as none of the subsequent posts responded to this one

[Heriberto]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Competition? REMF!

Somebody call a waahmbulance!

[Ship o' Fools]

I was wondering what was up. Settled? Dismissed?

Checked the court docket. Our heroes filed a notice of appeal - I guess they are appealing the denial of their SLAPP motion. They filed their opening appellate brief in March and Meyers filed his brief on July 5th. Next up, court notice of a date for oral argument. And the wheels of justice continue to turn.

[NorCalLaser]

I was wondering what was up. Settled? Dismissed?

Checked the court docket. Our heroes filed a notice of appeal - I guess they are appealing the denial of their SLAPP motion. They filed their opening appellate brief in March and Meyers filed his brief on July 5th. Next up, court notice of a date for oral argument. And the wheels of justice continue to turn.

I'm sure Al, Michael Kennedy and the gang are hard at work on their reply brief...

how'd the big fellas' brief look Mr C? can you drop box both of the briefs for us to peruse?

[Dawg Gonit]

I know Nothink, Nothink

[Gouvernail]

So which one is Klink and Hogan and...



is there a French guy involved to play Labeau?? ( actually all I want to know is...who is the actress??)

[dudewood]

Hmmmmm.........

My link

[MKennedy]

Hey this is fun

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=ROxvT8KKdFw

[jocal505]

Hmmmmm.........

My link

Interesting stuff, an online wisecrack about missing money being inside a politician's blouse. The disparaging blog post was up for 2.5 hours.
Judge ordered the poster to be fully identified.

MKennedy you brought a lot of order to the topic at hand.
Scot's troubles here are somewhat historic, jury's out.


Dudewood's link's text::

July 10 2012, in City Idaho
Spokesman Review must provide info on anonymous commenter

The Spokesman-Review must provide information that could identify an anonymous reader who typed a disparaging online comment about the chairwoman of the Kootenai County Republican Party in February, an Idaho judge ruled Tuesday.

The attorney for the chairwoman, Tina Jacobson, subpoenaed information about the identities of three Huckleberries Online readers who commented under assumed names below a photograph featuring Jacobson.

Under the name "almostinnocentbystander," the commenter questioned whether $10,000 reportedly missing from the Kootenai County Central Committee might be "stuffed inside Tina's blouse."

Two other commenters, "Phaedrus" and "outofstatetater," also typed comments responding to the original post about Jacobson's blouse.

The comments were deleted from Huckleberries Online after S-R blogger Dave Oliveria discovered them, but the first post was visible for about 2 ½ hours.

In late April, Jacobson filed a lawsuit against "John and/or Jane Doe." Her attorney, C. Matthew Andersen, subpoenaed the names of the commenters so the suit could proceed, and the newspaper responded with a motion to quash that request.

In a hearing last month, Jacobson's attorney argued that his client's reputation was hurt by the posts and sought to have the judge order the newspaper to provide identifying information about the people who made the comments.

The newspaper's attorney, Duane Swinton, argued at the June hearing that the blouse comment "wasn't nice" but that it was made on a blog site "where people express opinions, sometimes airing outrageous views."

In his written decision, Judge John Luster pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled since 1942 that the First Amendment does not protect defamatory speech. "… while the individuals are entitled to the right of anonymous free speech, this right is clearly limited when abused," Luster wrote.

He ordered the newspaper to give to the plaintiff "any document establishing the identity, e-mail address, and IP (Internet Protocol) addresses of 'almostinnocentbystander.'"

However, Luster also ruled that the paper would not have to provide similar information for the two readers who commented on the original post, saying they did not abuse their rights to free speech "by making defamatory comments."

Andersen, Jacobson's attorney, said he was pleased by Luster's ruling.

"The ruling is a reaffirmation of the historically long-standing legal rule that there is no constitutional protection for a defaming statement," Andersen said. "The interesting twist in this is the application of that legal rule to an anonymous Internet commenter. That is the part that is refreshing."

Gary Graham, editor of The Spokesman-Review, said he was disappointed with Luster's decision but he has not yet decided whether the newspaper will pursue an appeal.

"However, we are glad the judge ruled that we don't have to provide information about the two people who simply commented on the original posting," he said.

In his ruling, Luster noted that Idaho, unlike many states, has no "shield law" protecting reporters. However, that doesn't matter because the longtime journalist who oversees the Huckleberries Online blog, Oliveria, wasn't acting as a reporter, but rather as a "facilitator of commentary and administrator of the blog."

Under a clipping of a New Yorker cartoon, Luster said the court recognizes that the job description of a reporter has changed.

But "it is clear that Mr. Oliveria acted as an administrator of the blog when he removed the subject postings" and there is no indication that the information was intended to be used in a news story or editorial opinion piece, the judge wrote.

[Blowhard]

Time to send E.G. (that's Spanish) a cake with two candles -- his lawsuit just passed its second anniversary. Score? Haven't seen that Big Payout he was looking for yet.

[SemiSalt]

A case with some similar issues:

http://cyb3rcrim3.bl...and-public.html

[markr]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Isn't he a porn star..?

[DoRag]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Isn't he a porn star..?

Good point. He was until he got a very visable case of herpes - which didn't look good and the chicks refused to work with him.

[NorCalLaser]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Isn't he a porn star..?

Good point. He was until he got a very visable case of herbes - which didn't look good and the chicks refused to work with him.

whats herbes?

[stranded]

french for a type of growth

[hobot]

Herbes the Love Bug.

[familysailor]

MKennedy has retired and gone back to selling lemonade on a busy street in San Fernando.

Isn't he a porn star..?

Good point. He was until he got a very visable case of herbes - which didn't look good and the chicks refused to work with him.

whats herbes?

It's how he, (??) pronounces Herpes when his lips are sore from a massive eruption of "Herbes"

[jocal505]

DM now listed as his own attorney?

[PeterHuston]

DM now listed as his own attorney?

Link?

[jocal505]

DM now listed as his own attorney?

Link?

37-2010-00057972-CU-DF-NC

Pasted from <http://courtindex.sd...e=NC&applcode=C>

[Beer Can]

One of the tests of libel is that it reduces the opinion held of the plaintiff in the eyes of the plaintiff's associates and friends.

In the case of a Village Idiot Plaintiff, it can often be difficult to prove that such a reduction in reputation has actually occurred or is indeed possible.

As has been posted here before, libel "per se" does nto require any such proof. Here is one definition:

libel per se n. broadcast or written publication of a false statement about another which accuses him/her of a crime, immoral acts, inability to perform his/her profession, having a loathsome disease (like syphilis), or dishonesty in business. Such claims are considered so obviously harmful that malice need not be proved to obtain a judgment for "general damages," and not just specific losses.

In other words, false statements regarding dishonesty in business or committing crimes do not require you to prove that your reputation was harmed to recover damages.

[fan]

FYI from todays scuttlebut


* From Dan Meyers, Newport RI
And here we go again. Ben Ainslie wins his fifth Olympic medal. Then goes straight into the America's Cup World Series and right off the bat has a spectacular performance in the fleet racing, with virtually no multi-hull or fixed wing multi-hull experience. So winning the ISAF World Sailor of the Year is cause for congratulations, not condemnation.

Can't this sport, which historically has been the vocation and avocation of principled women and men get past the politics of envy? Past the ridiculous libel and slander and nonsense about in-laws and all manners of absurdity? Let's not forget that the young ones that are following in our wake are watching intently. Put your jealousy away; it's a bad look.

So to Ben, well done and fair winds in the future.

I notice there is nothign about getting away from lawsuits and petty grievences or maybe those fall under "all manners of absurdity"

[DoRag]

FYI from todays scuttlebut


* From Dan Meyers, Newport RI
And here we go again. Ben Ainslie wins his fifth Olympic medal. Then goes straight into the America's Cup World Series and right off the bat has a spectacular performance in the fleet racing, with virtually no multi-hull or fixed wing multi-hull experience. So winning the ISAF World Sailor of the Year is cause for congratulations, not condemnation.

Can't this sport, which historically has been the vocation and avocation of principled women and men get past the politics of envy? Past the ridiculous libel and slander and nonsense about in-laws and all manners of absurdity? Let's not forget that the young ones that are following in our wake are watching intently. Put your jealousy away; it's a bad look.

So to Ben, well done and fair winds in the future.

I notice there is nothign about getting away from lawsuits and petty grievences or maybe those fall under "all manners of absurdity"

That seems like an oversight and I'm sure that Dan will correct it.

[StayinStrewn]

ha, saw that this morning...

[Loco.]

FYI from todays scuttlebut


* From Dan Meyers, Newport RI
And here we go again. Ben Ainslie wins his fifth Olympic medal. Then goes straight into the America's Cup World Series and right off the bat has a spectacular performance in the fleet racing, with virtually no multi-hull or fixed wing multi-hull experience. So winning the ISAF World Sailor of the Year is cause for congratulations, not condemnation.

Can't this sport, which historically has been the vocation and avocation of principled women and men get past the politics of envy? Past the ridiculous libel and slander and nonsense about in-laws and all manners of absurdity? Let's not forget that the young ones that are following in our wake are watching intently. Put your jealousy away; it's a bad look.

So to Ben, well done and fair winds in the future.

I notice there is nothign about getting away from lawsuits and petty grievences or maybe those fall under "all manners of absurdity"

I particularly like the bit about principled men and women.

I think Dan is trying to tell us something.

[Blowhard]

The matter is, umm, in the ample bosom of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in San Diego. (Both Justice McConnell & Haller could be SCOTW.) Next up is (you should forgive the expression) "Oral" argument. Perhaps a live OTWA feed or at least dueling Tweets from the courtroom is in order?

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2012 at 1:30 p.m.

The Honorable Judith McConnell, Presiding Justice, and The Honorable Associate Justices Gilbert Richard Huffman and Judith Haller

D060825 Meyers v. Tempesta et al.

[Blowhard]

Inquiring minds who want to know can find Ed's Opening Brief at:

http://www.lalawlibr.../briefs/D060825

[DA-WOODY]

Inquiring minds who want to know can find Ed's Opening Brief at:

http://www.lalawlibr.../briefs/D060825

Why are Briefs so long And still called Briefs ???









for Scot we hope

[Blowhard]

Aha! A volunteer commentator! "....And now, live from the third floor of the Symphony Towers building in Beautiful Historic San Diego, it's the Bacon Sandwich Smackdown!!! [cue smattering of polite APPLAUSE] [Medium shot of JUDGES pan right] Asking the penetrating questions only he dares ask, like "Got Wood?" Here's your host, give it up for DA WOODY!!!!" [Dolly back, slow title wipe and fade to HOST.]


Hmmm. Script needs serious editing.

[NorCalLaser]

I wonder how long after the oral arguments will we know the fate of Sailing Anarchy?

[readyabout82]

that particular court has 90 days after oral arguments to decide...

[BIAM]

what a fucking waste of time and money.

[rgscpat]

Instead of wasting time in court, people could be rowing or sailing dinghies or some such...

https://photos-a.xx....069270461_s.jpg

[Albatros]

I wonder how long after the oral arguments will we know the fate of Sailing Anarchy?

oral arguments ?
oral arguments ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????


paging George Hackett, paging George Hackett, George Hackett urgently needed at the Haswell-fat (alledgedly) blob thread

[corkob]

Who are the ten John Does mentioned in the title to the proceedings. Have they been identified and are they entering a defense?

[Tequila McIngbird]

This could have been settled on day one by referring DM to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

[jazzdog]

Three guesses which company this refers to

Mother Inherits Dead Son’s Student Loans, Petitions to Have Them Forgiven



Three years after her son’s death, a 61-year-old Michigan woman is still on the hook for his student loans — and a Change.org petition she started now has nearly 200,000 signatures demanding the companies forgive the loans and change their policies. Jermaine Edwards went to college to study music production, and his mother, Ella, agreed to cosign his student loans to help him attend school. However, Jermaine died of natural causes in 2009 at age 24, leaving his mother responsible for the loans.

“That’s when American Education Services (AES) and National Collegiate Trust (NCT) turned my son’s dream into a nightmare for me and the two year old son he left behind,” Edwards wrote in the petition. Edwards had three student loans when he died, two federal and one private. The two federal government loans were forgiven within a month of his death. However, the private loan company is refusing to forgive the loan.

“He was paying the loan bills when he died, but the balance is still over $10,000, and if I’m ever a couple days late on a payment, the calls keep coming until I pay,” Edwards told ABC News.
Edwards wrote in the petition that she was so depressed after her son’s death that she could barely get out of bed, and has since been under doctors’ care. She requested an early retirement, but is now back working. The money is still not enough to cover the bills. “I am 61 years old and I have been trying to work to make Jermaine’s loan payments…but I simply don’t have the money,” Edwards wrote. “To make matters worse, Jermaine left behind a young son whose mother doesn’t have many resources. Therefore, she relies on me to help support Jermaine’s son.”
The petition directed to the institutions includes a letter calling for forgiveness of the loan.

“I’m horrified at your institution’s practice of hounding a dead student’s family for repayment of student loans he’ll never get a chance to use,” to letter reads. “I’m calling on you to do the only humane thing — let this still-grieving mother mourn the loss of her only son in peace. I stand with the Ella Edwards family and decent people everywhere in demanding that you discharge Jermaine Edwards’ student loan debt today.” Edwards told ABC she decided to start the petition to demand a change in the laws surrounding student loans, and to warn other parents what they might be getting into if they take out a private loan. “I suffer every day, and I started the petition because I don’t want any other mom to suffer like I am,” Edwards said, through tears. “People need to be aware these private loan people will come after you like a shark. I would advise people never to get a private loan until the law changes.”

The loan companies have not returned calls for comment from ABC News.

http://abcnews.go.co...-them-forgiven/

[Bob Perry]

Sometimes you just feel like punching somebody.
This is one of those times.

[Heriberto]

+1 Bob.

The vampire squids, sucking the life blood out of anything they can possibly jab their giant proboscis into.

[bhyde]

Sometimes you just feel like punching somebody.
This is one of those times.

Wrapping your fists in bacon would probably be appropriate.

[DoRag]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

[MKF]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

Unless I am wrong their is death insurance on all these loans. Think we may have a case of double dipping - love to see the docs, been doing well on YS legal ARB last few years, dorag u should be up to speed on this shite...

[titanuranus]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

You are talking in Pre Obama realities

[soak_ed]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

I'll explain the issue you stupid REMF troll, there is a little word (well, it's a medium sized word) called compassion, look it up in a dictionary sometime.

[Shaggy]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

Totally agree here,
now if you want to bitch and moan at them for giving her a loan she obviously could not pay in the first place then have at it. But the fact she cosigned means she knowingly agreed to pay if he could not. Apples to oranges in regards to a federal grant or loan. This one is private and not unlike cosinging for a $50,000 Mercedes with your 18 yo...... Dumb for her and preditory for the dealer, but not forgiveable in any rational universe.....

[soak_ed]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

Totally agree here,
now if you want to bitch and moan at them for giving her a loan she obviously could not pay in the first place then have at it. But the fact she cosigned means she knowingly agreed to pay if he could not. Apples to oranges in regards to a federal grant or loan. This one is private and not unlike cosinging for a $50,000 Mercedes with your 18 yo...... Dumb for her and preditory for the dealer, but not forgiveable in any rational universe.....

WTF, is this the secret meeting site of the John Galt fan club? Let's see; the kid wants a loan, mom co-signs, gets his degree, graduates and is paying the loan on time. Then the kid has the nerve to die of all things and mom is having trouble paying and the loan sharks are on her like stink on shit. So if the kid didn't have mom co-sign then the loan company would be SOL right? But no, it is bad enough mom is coping with the death of said child, helping to support his wife and child but since DM needs new sails for his jumbo sized yacht, the collectors are on her ass to pay up. I hope you and all the other hard asses on this forum including that REMF DR, have the misfortune to have something terrible happen to you and I hope you get the same attitude in return. There sure are some fucked up people around here. Better yet, you get on the phone and ask mom to cough up the money. If I were her I would tell them to shove their papers up their ass and hunt me down and kill me if they want their fucking money. What a wonderful world we live in.

[titanuranus]

Wonder what he died from. natural causes for a 24 year old?

he was able to father a child at 22

feel bad for the mom

[Shaggy]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

Totally agree here,
now if you want to bitch and moan at them for giving her a loan she obviously could not pay in the first place then have at it. But the fact she cosigned means she knowingly agreed to pay if he could not. Apples to oranges in regards to a federal grant or loan. This one is private and not unlike cosinging for a $50,000 Mercedes with your 18 yo...... Dumb for her and preditory for the dealer, but not forgiveable in any rational universe.....

WTF, is this the secret meeting site of the John Galt fan club? Let's see; the kid wants a loan, mom co-signs, gets his degree, graduates and is paying the loan on time. Then the kid has the nerve to die of all things and mom is having trouble paying and the loan sharks are on her like stink on shit. So if the kid didn't have mom co-sign then the loan company would be SOL right? But no, it is bad enough mom is coping with the death of said child, helping to support his wife and child but since DM needs new sails for his jumbo sized yacht, the collectors are on her ass to pay up. I hope you and all the other hard asses on this forum including that REMF DR, have the misfortune to have something terrible happen to you and I hope you get the same attitude in return. There sure are some fucked up people around here. Better yet, you get on the phone and ask mom to cough up the money. If I were her I would tell them to shove their papers up their ass and hunt me down and kill me if they want their fucking money. What a wonderful world we live in.

Look, I am not trying to sound uncompassionate here, but it is what it is. Facts are that she cosigned. If I were to go out and cosign for a 50,000 loan on a melgis for my 18 yo kid to campaign and he died, would they automatically forgive the loan?? Tragic yes, but that is the law. Unfortuantely that is how banks work. Do I agree with their preditory practices and the means to which they are pursuing this fine upstanding grandma, no!!! But that is the contaract she signed so she should be held accountable. Personally I think they should take her situation into account and find some other means to pay off the loan. Bankruptcy or refying the loan to some more affordible pmts comes to mind, but they took the cash. Gotta pay the piper at some point.....

['moondance44]

I think I know this lady. She's a member at Pequot YC and sails a Swan 48. She spends $10k
on bottom cleaning and wine. She can pay. ( If its the same Ella Edwards)

[bhyde]

Maybe Dan could repo the fatherless kid and sell him off. That would probably make him happy.

[mr_ryano]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

Totally agree here,
now if you want to bitch and moan at them for giving her a loan she obviously could not pay in the first place then have at it. But the fact she cosigned means she knowingly agreed to pay if he could not. Apples to oranges in regards to a federal grant or loan. This one is private and not unlike cosinging for a $50,000 Mercedes with your 18 yo...... Dumb for her and preditory for the dealer, but not forgiveable in any rational universe.....

WTF, is this the secret meeting site of the John Galt fan club? Let's see; the kid wants a loan, mom co-signs, gets his degree, graduates and is paying the loan on time. Then the kid has the nerve to die of all things and mom is having trouble paying and the loan sharks are on her like stink on shit. So if the kid didn't have mom co-sign then the loan company would be SOL right? But no, it is bad enough mom is coping with the death of said child, helping to support his wife and child but since DM needs new sails for his jumbo sized yacht, the collectors are on her ass to pay up. I hope you and all the other hard asses on this forum including that REMF DR, have the misfortune to have something terrible happen to you and I hope you get the same attitude in return. There sure are some fucked up people around here. Better yet, you get on the phone and ask mom to cough up the money. If I were her I would tell them to shove their papers up their ass and hunt me down and kill me if they want their fucking money. What a wonderful world we live in.

What do you think happens to mortgages, credit card bills, and other debt when you die? EVERY company that loans out money expects it back. Death sucks, but it never is grounds to forgive any loan. Get life insurance if you don't want all the sharks going after your estate and survivors.

[stranded]

[ QUOTE ]


Totally agree here,
now if you want to bitch and moan at them for giving her a loan she obviously could not pay in the first place then have at it. But the fact she cosigned means she knowingly agreed to pay if he could not. Apples to oranges in regards to a federal grant or loan. This one is private and not unlike cosinging for a $50,000 Mercedes with your 18 yo...... Dumb for her and preditory for the dealer, but not forgiveable in any rational universe.....


[ UNQUOTE ]


In many jurisdictions, it is now becoming the standard, that someone offering a loan has to be satisfied that the borrower ( or guarantor )

has the capacity to repay the debt. AND document reasons why. ( also a requirement of lenders insurers )

This is then brought out and checked in the case of a default.

Is there a limit below which this cannot be applied in the U. S. if it is relevant here ?

the death insurance question also begs if he was offerd to take out cover,

regardless of whether the lender also covered themdelves for this.


This raises, also, questions re duty of disclosure by both lender and borrower

there HAS to be some documentation lurking regarding these items .... or am I dreaming ?

[soak_ed]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

Totally agree here,
now if you want to bitch and moan at them for giving her a loan she obviously could not pay in the first place then have at it. But the fact she cosigned means she knowingly agreed to pay if he could not. Apples to oranges in regards to a federal grant or loan. This one is private and not unlike cosinging for a $50,000 Mercedes with your 18 yo...... Dumb for her and preditory for the dealer, but not forgiveable in any rational universe.....

WTF, is this the secret meeting site of the John Galt fan club? Let's see; the kid wants a loan, mom co-signs, gets his degree, graduates and is paying the loan on time. Then the kid has the nerve to die of all things and mom is having trouble paying and the loan sharks are on her like stink on shit. So if the kid didn't have mom co-sign then the loan company would be SOL right? But no, it is bad enough mom is coping with the death of said child, helping to support his wife and child but since DM needs new sails for his jumbo sized yacht, the collectors are on her ass to pay up. I hope you and all the other hard asses on this forum including that REMF DR, have the misfortune to have something terrible happen to you and I hope you get the same attitude in return. There sure are some fucked up people around here. Better yet, you get on the phone and ask mom to cough up the money. If I were her I would tell them to shove their papers up their ass and hunt me down and kill me if they want their fucking money. What a wonderful world we live in.

What do you think happens to mortgages, credit card bills, and other debt when you die? EVERY company that loans out money expects it back. Death sucks, but it never is grounds to forgive any loan. Get life insurance if you don't want all the sharks going after your estate and survivors.

What an asinine statement. Death is certainly grounds to forgive a loan. If you die the creditors can certainly make a claim on your estate, unless there is some paper such as a co-signer or joint loan with a spouse, they can't go after anyone else. People die all the time in debt and the creditor has to eat the debt. The creditor is well aware of this since people have been dieing for a long time now, and they build in this expense to the cost of giving everyone credit. My heart does not bleed for the creditors.

[DoRag]

Any debt would have to be satisfied with the estate, if any. A difference here is that Ella cosigned the note, therefore the obligation is hers - just as she agreed, in writing, to accept. A death, while unfortunate, does not alter that.

[Trickypig]

Any debt would have to be satisfied with the estate, if any. A difference here is that Ella cosigned the note, therefore the obligation is hers - just as she agreed, in writing, to accept. A death, while unfortunate, does not alter that.

Pages of legalese described as a note ... noice

[walterbshaffer]

What an asinine statement. Death is certainly grounds to forgive a loan. If you die the creditors can certainly make a claim on your estate, unless there is some paper such as a co-signer or joint loan with a spouse, they can't go after anyone else. People die all the time in debt and the creditor has to eat the debt. The creditor is well aware of this since people have been dieing for a long time now, and they build in this expense to the cost of giving everyone credit. My heart does not bleed for the creditors.

Death is not grounds to forgive a loan. In this case the lender made the loan based upon the ability of all signors to repay the loan, including, perhaps especially in this case, the income & assets of the mom. In fact given the age of the son at application it is likley that the lender looked only at the ability of the mom to repay the loan.

Really, if death were to be made a reason for wiping out debt dying people would all be borrowing as much as they could.

Does it sound to anyone else that the deceased son is the father to a child not in his household? Has the son been supportive of that child, or did he run out on that obligation too?

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

[pete_nj]

What an asinine statement. Death is certainly grounds to forgive a loan. If you die the creditors can certainly make a claim on your estate, unless there is some paper such as a co-signer or joint loan with a spouse, they can't go after anyone else. People die all the time in debt and the creditor has to eat the debt. The creditor is well aware of this since people have been dieing for a long time now, and they build in this expense to the cost of giving everyone credit. My heart does not bleed for the creditors.

Death is not grounds to forgive a loan. In this case the lender made the loan based upon the ability of all signors to repay the loan, including, perhaps especially in this case, the income & assets of the mom. In fact given the age of the son at application it is likley that the lender looked only at the ability of the mom to repay the loan.

Really, if death were to be made a reason for wiping out debt dying people would all be borrowing as much as they could.

Does it sound to anyone else that the deceased son is the father to a child not in his household? Has the son been supportive of that child, or did he run out on that obligation too?

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

Imagine having to get a physical to qualify for a mortgage or a car loan...

[Trickypig]

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

The 200,000 signatories of the petition obviously can't see her outrageous "sense of entitlement" in this respect.

[Beer Can]

What an asinine statement. Death is certainly grounds to forgive a loan. If you die the creditors can certainly make a claim on your estate, unless there is some paper such as a co-signer or joint loan with a spouse, they can't go after anyone else. People die all the time in debt and the creditor has to eat the debt. The creditor is well aware of this since people have been dieing for a long time now, and they build in this expense to the cost of giving everyone credit. My heart does not bleed for the creditors.

Death is not grounds to forgive a loan. In this case the lender made the loan based upon the ability of all signors to repay the loan, including, perhaps especially in this case, the income & assets of the mom. In fact given the age of the son at application it is likley that the lender looked only at the ability of the mom to repay the loan.

Really, if death were to be made a reason for wiping out debt dying people would all be borrowing as much as they could.

Does it sound to anyone else that the deceased son is the father to a child not in his household? Has the son been supportive of that child, or did he run out on that obligation too?

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

Agreed. This one is a no-brainer. I don't see what all the fuss is about.

[Tucky]

I'm fascinated by the way this thread has morphed from free speech to debt obligations. I'd be interested at how people would fall out on the two issues, meaning what percentage of people that believe in free speech, i.e. the the complete right to state one's opinion of Dan Meyers and not have to be accountable for that opinion would then hold for the right of the company to hold the woman accountable for her written word. Or not.

I'm in the camp that says I have almost an absolute right to state my opinion of Dan Meyers, including my opinion of whether or not his company should go after the mother in this case, but his company has an absolute right to hold her to what she agreed to, despite her ignorance or her son's death. I'm guessing that makes me a bit of an outlier on the graph.

[soak_ed]

What an asinine statement. Death is certainly grounds to forgive a loan. If you die the creditors can certainly make a claim on your estate, unless there is some paper such as a co-signer or joint loan with a spouse, they can't go after anyone else. People die all the time in debt and the creditor has to eat the debt. The creditor is well aware of this since people have been dieing for a long time now, and they build in this expense to the cost of giving everyone credit. My heart does not bleed for the creditors.

Death is not grounds to forgive a loan. In this case the lender made the loan based upon the ability of all signors to repay the loan, including, perhaps especially in this case, the income & assets of the mom. In fact given the age of the son at application it is likley that the lender looked only at the ability of the mom to repay the loan.

Really, if death were to be made a reason for wiping out debt dying people would all be borrowing as much as they could.

Does it sound to anyone else that the deceased son is the father to a child not in his household? Has the son been supportive of that child, or did he run out on that obligation too?

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

Try reading exactly what I said. If you die with loans outstanding and only you signed the paper and you have no estate, the creditor cannot collect on the loan. Got it?

[Trickypig]

I'm fascinated by the way this thread has morphed from free speech to debt obligations. I'd be interested at how people would fall out on the two issues, meaning what percentage of people that believe in free speech, i.e. the the complete right to state one's opinion of Dan Meyers and not have to be accountable for that opinion would then hold for the right of the company to hold the woman accountable for her written word. Or not.

I'm in the camp that says I have almost an absolute right to state my opinion of Dan Meyers, including my opinion of whether or not his company should go after the mother in this case, but his company has an absolute right to hold her to what she agreed to, despite her ignorance or her son's death. I'm guessing that makes me a bit of an outlier on the graph.

If we can be agreed on the fact that she is unable to repay the debt then she should have never signed the document.

Since the company is a money lender, with its numerous actuaries and lawyers, surely there should be some sort of accountability on their part to ensure any loan can be repaid without consigning the borrower to poverty until death.

[NorCalLaser]

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

The 200,000 signatories of the petition obviously can't see her outrageous "sense of entitlement" in this respect.

instead of signing, why dont they each throw in a quarter or 2 and make this go away?

this is one more reason EVERYONE should have life insurance. i bought some from a well known local sailor here in SF bay area, it costs me about $20 a month for $500,000 in coverage. PM me for info if you like.

[Bob Perry]

When Spike died he only owed money to one guy, a tax accountant who charged him $800 to do his tax return. $800 fucking dollars! When that guy called me I told him I would never, ever pay that bill. He went away. Spike also had several life insurance policies all made out with his brother as the beneficiary. Spike just signed up for them at his various work places. I guess he figured that he would outlive Mom and Dad so his brother was the likely choice. Spike would be/is very happy that Max benefitted. Max has the new baby and lots of life to deal with. He used part of the money to pay down his mortgage and he made the comment one day that "Spike now owns part of this house". I closed Spike's checking account and paid off his credit card.

It's very ugly shit when you have to do this for your child. My heart goes out to that mother.

[stranded]

borrower or lender takes out insurance = different story

lender does not sufficiently document reasons for belief that borrower has capacity to pay back loan = different story

lender accepts guarantee from a third party .... any possible challenge or request to set aside the debt

will depend on documentation in support of reasons to make the loan

this documentation will be dependant on information supplied by the borrower

in other words, a loan is a type of contract

a contract involves duties and obligations from TWO parties ...

not simply sign and do or die ( pun not intended )

[smackdaddy]

Not a bad brief. Well played MK.

[Trickypig]

 Screen Shot 2012-11-30 at 12.15.19 PM.png   322K   91 downloads

Well the damage is done and the community has a broke 61 year old grandmother with two dependants, grieving for her dead son and trying to pay off her son's school loan.

[MKennedy]

Not a bad brief. Well played MK.

Thanks. Coupla typos, but that's kind of my trademark.

['moondance44]

When Spike died he only owed money to one guy, a tax accountant who charged him $800 to do his tax return. $800 fucking dollars! When that guy called me I told him I would never, ever pay that bill. He went away. Spike also had several life insurance policies all made out with his brother as the beneficiary. Spike just signed up for them at his various work places. I guess he figured that he would outlive Mom and Dad so his brother was the likely choice. Spike would be/is very happy that Max benefitted. Max has the new baby and lots of life to deal with. He used part of the money to pay down his mortgage and he made the comment one day that "Spike now owns part of this house". I closed Spike's checking account and paid off his credit card.

It's very ugly shit when you have to do this for your child. My heart goes out to that mother.

I cannot imagine being in your position and pray for your family.
$800 is probably a ridiculous bill for what was required for a young man's tax returns. The guy does probably deserves something for the work which is likely closer to $100 But since it appears he is trying to take advantage of a situaton I agree with you telling him to f.off.

Many companies would write off this loan but they are going to protect their interests in the begining until they know the whole story. Maybe this kid's uncle is P.Diddy or 50 Cent.

young kids dont believe in life insurance. thats money that can go to beer or whatever . everyone has choices. And with no family
its not needed. But once you have a child and you do not have at least some life insurance, that is being an irresponsible fucktard.
I wouldnt do that to my Mom and kid. Term policies arent expensive for a healthy 24 yr old But he probably didnt have anyone to explain this to him.

[Bob Perry]

I have no idea why Spike ended up with multiple life insurance policies. They probably just asked him at his various jobs, "Do you want life insurance?" and he said yes. He was always very thoughtful and considerate and in retrospect maybe he knew exactly what he was doing. The results shows that he did.

[Pete M]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

[DoRag]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

Actually, student loans were provided a unique protection as too many "students" would run up a large debt, graduate, immediately declare bankruptcy and discharge all their debt. As a result, the student loan market dried up as no one would lend under those circumstances. Hence the unique aspect to student loans.

on the otehr hand, a government sponsored student loan would be "forgiven." That is tantamount to transfering the debt to the taxpayers - not a unique form of wealth distribution now in vogue by BHO.....

[Heriberto]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

Bingo. Student loan companies like Dan Meyer's outfit lobbied hard to eliminate federal education loans and lobbied extraordinarily hard to exempt student loans from bankruptcy protection. Their argument was that an education (educated mind)was an asset that you could never repossess, unlike physical property, and would always belong to the student. So in this case, once the student (mind asset) was destroyed, by the previous logic, there is no asset which the mother can rely on, and so bankruptcy protection should be afforded.

Speaking in purely bullshit asshole impersonal fuckyouIgotmine John Galt-speak which always seems to suit moneyed assholes as long as they have money and not a minute later.

As per Dan Meyers, it isn't slander to say that I believe the student loan industry is, in my opinion, a government-sanctioned racket, which a civilized country would completely obviate by providing direct government loans for education. Just like they used to in the "bad old days".

[Bull Gator]

A reasonable CPA should be able to power though a basic return in an hour. At a reasonable hourly rate of $250 the appropriate amount is 250. Of course turbo tax is the better option.

[us7070]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

would you invest your money in student loans if the borrower could just escape them by declaring bankruptcy?

the problem is that young people with few assets have very little to loose by declaring bankruptcy.

there would be very little private money for student loans, and the rates would be much higher, without this protection for those willing to risk their money making these loans.

[The Commodork]

"Speaking in purely bullshit asshole impersonal fuckyouIgotmine John Galt-speak which always seems to suit moneyed assholes as long as they have money and not a minute later."

That's a beauty, Heriberto!!!

[Bob Perry]

+1 Heriberto!

It's so easy to feel sanctimonious when you are on the outside of the situation. People are not percentage points to me.

[Trickypig]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

would you invest your money in student loans if the borrower could just escape them by declaring bankruptcy?

the problem is that young people with few assets have very little to loose by declaring bankruptcy.

there would be very little private money for student loans, and the rates would be much higher, without this protection for those willing to risk their money making these loans.

You don't have a very high opinion of university students nowadays. What graduate wants to start their career with a bankruptcy underpinning their reputation?

[DoRag]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

would you invest your money in student loans if the borrower could just escape them by declaring bankruptcy?

the problem is that young people with few assets have very little to loose by declaring bankruptcy.

there would be very little private money for student loans, and the rates would be much higher, without this protection for those willing to risk their money making these loans.

You don't have a very high opinion of university students nowadays. What graduate wants to start their career with a bankruptcy underpinning their reputation?

Perhaps someone who borrowed, say $50K, to finance a degree in ethnic studies who now can't find a job?

[sledracr]

Not a bad brief. Well played MK.

+1 - nicely done.

[stranded]

and what is happening NOW about mortgages that were written before 2008 for low income / unemployed people with little or no capacity to repay ?

[Navigare]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

This hurts, but I have to agree with the quoted writer. If you cosign you must be prepared to fulfill your part of the agreement.
I think I need a shower.

[Trickypig]

Can someone explain to me what the issue is here?

Ella signed the note and agreed to repay the loan if Jermaine didn't. Since Jermaine apparently didn't repay the loan - Ella needs to fulfill her obligation to do so.

This hurts, but I have to agree with the quoted writer. If you cosign you must be prepared to fulfill your part of the agreement.
I think I need a shower.

Careful in agreeing with DoRag ... there is nothing quite so appalling as a younger man who expresses indifferent right wing sentiments. Don't make `Lord of the Flies' bedtime reading for your children.

[soak_ed]

+1 Heriberto!

It's so easy to feel sanctimonious when you are on the outside of the situation. People are not percentage points to me.

+1000

[Steam Flyer]

I have to say that it seems that the sense of entitlement & irresponsibility has certainly grown recently. Lets don't encourage it further.

The 200,000 signatories of the petition obviously can't see her outrageous "sense of entitlement" in this respect.

Well, why doesn't each one of the petition signers donate $1 to a loan repayment fund?

However, let's take a look at this "sense of entitlement" thing. What about business risk? Here we have a loan shark who took a risk of loaning money, either did not take out insurance (or maybe they're double-dipping), and now wants the gov't to help them turn a profit on a their mistake. Are they entitled to that?

FB- Doug

[Navigare]

On the other hand, vikings tend to deal with bankers differently on our side of the Atlantic.

[Heriberto]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

would you invest your money in student loans if the borrower could just escape them by declaring bankruptcy?

the problem is that young people with few assets have very little to loose by declaring bankruptcy.

there would be very little private money for student loans, and the rates would be much higher, without this protection for those willing to risk their money making these loans.

So you are against the entire concept of bankruptcy protection then? Or it should be reserved for people who have lots of assets? These guys argument was the asset was the student's educated mind, which couldn't be repossessed like a house or car. What might have been reasonable was to eliminate bankruptcy protection for very narrow circumstances rather than broadly like this, and eliminate their ability to require co-signers. Every other bank has to deal with risk, why shouldn't they?

But in many ways, I agree, it's obviously too difficult to make money ethically this way, so let's outlaw private student loans, no problem. The government should be giving these loans directly. What's the worst thing that could happen? Lots of little bailouts that only cover loan principals rather than speculative bank profits?

[DoRag]

Who are the ten John Does mentioned in the title to the proceedings. Have they been identified and are they entering a defense?

You can guess who the J Does will be - it's rather obvious. DM will wait until the anti SLAPP matter is swatted away, then file against these heinous transgressors and the fur will fly!

[DoRag]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

would you invest your money in student loans if the borrower could just escape them by declaring bankruptcy?

the problem is that young people with few assets have very little to loose by declaring bankruptcy.

there would be very little private money for student loans, and the rates would be much higher, without this protection for those willing to risk their money making these loans.

So you are against the entire concept of bankruptcy protection then? Or it should be reserved for people who have lots of assets? These guys argument was the asset was the student's educated mind, which couldn't be repossessed like a house or car. What might have been reasonable was to eliminate bankruptcy protection for very narrow circumstances rather than broadly like this, and eliminate their ability to require co-signers. Every other bank has to deal with risk, why shouldn't they?

But in many ways, I agree, it's obviously too difficult to make money ethically this way, so let's outlaw private student loans, no problem. The government should be giving these loans directly. What's the worst thing that could happen? Lots of little bailouts that only cover loan principals rather than speculative bank profits?

It is not the role of government to intrude into a private enterprise. Further, the BHO student "loan" progarm is predicated upon a number of social engineering elements. This is not to mention that defaults will be bourne by the taxpayers - yet another not to subtle form of wealth redistribution.

[DA-WOODY]

the subject of this threads it Truly Sad (yet Cut & Dry)

Much Sadder stories of nice people puttiong their homes up for Bail

How could you let Johny just stay in Jail (It was a Mistake he 's a sweet kid)

Only to lose their home when the Facking Scumbag never shows

I knew a grandmother more or less forced to put her house up to Bail out a Facked who "Didn't Rob the Bank Really"

She lost the house as the Facker skipped to continue a life of Drugs and whatever


In the studen's case CHEAP Life Insurance matching the student loan amount should have been paid for by the Kid (For the MOM)

[soak_ed]

The problem I've got with the private loans and this lady is the private loan companies were given protection from bankruptcy.

now bankruptcy is a federal law allowing a judge to forgive or restructure your debts depending on circumstance. people and businesses declare bankruptcy all the time - it's a cost of doing business. why on earth private student loan company's were shielded from bankruptcy is quite beyond me, it's not like the loans were at 3% or anything - it just smacks of being wrong.

would you invest your money in student loans if the borrower could just escape them by declaring bankruptcy?

the problem is that young people with few assets have very little to loose by declaring bankruptcy.

there would be very little private money for student loans, and the rates would be much higher, without this protection for those willing to risk their money making these loans.

So you are against the entire concept of bankruptcy protection then? Or it should be reserved for people who have lots of assets? These guys argument was the asset was the student's educated mind, which couldn't be repossessed like a house or car. What might have been reasonable was to eliminate bankruptcy protection for very narrow circumstances rather than broadly like this, and eliminate their ability to require co-signers. Every other bank has to deal with risk, why shouldn't they?

But in many ways, I agree, it's obviously too difficult to make money ethically this way, so let's outlaw private student loans, no problem. The government should be giving these loans directly. What's the worst thing that could happen? Lots of little bailouts that only cover loan principals rather than speculative bank profits?

It is not the role of government to intrude into a private enterprise. Further, the BHO student "loan" progarm is predicated upon a number of social engineering elements. This is not to mention that defaults will be bourne by the taxpayers - yet another not too subtle form of wealth redistribution.

Well DR, my old friend, you see the trouble with you Ayn Rand acolytes is you love to hide behind that old "wealth redistribution" thing. How about the real "wealth redistribution" that happens every day, all of the time. You know, the kind of wealth redistribution that occurs when executives are paid obscene amounts of money for mismanaging their companies and raking in huge salaries and bonuses and refuse to pay their workers a living wage. The kind of wealth distribution that occurs when said executives ship all the jobs overseas because they can save money and then bitch because their workers can't find another job and have to collect unemployment. Why don't we hear complaints about that kind of wealth distribution? Y'all can't have it both ways. It is disingenuous to refuse to pay a living wage then bitch because people can get paid better for not working than they can get for busting their ass for pitiful wages. A hearty fuck you to you your ilk. Be very careful, when people have nothing left to lose they become very dangerous, a lesson that people have forgotten all through history. Come the revolution, Imma commin' back from Poland just to have the pleasure to see your kind burn. Just sayin'.