Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
1. No, Steve, they found your filings abusive
Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:12 AM
Dec 2012

WHEREAS, since July 2004, Mr. Haas, appearing pro se and acting purportedly on behalf of Collateral Logistics Inc.(“CLI”), has filed dozens of pleadings in this bankruptcy case;and

...

WHEREAS, CLI, a corporation, is a legal entity separate from its president and shareholder, Mr. Haas; and

WHEREAS, by Order dated November 10, 2011, the Court held that Mr. Haas did not have standing to be heard on behalf of CLI or himself because he was not a creditor, shareholder or party in interest in this case (D.I. 2459); and

WHEREAS, on October 24, 2012, Mr. Haas filed an emergency motion for payment asserting an individual claim for payment under the Court-approved contracts between the Debtor and CLI (the “Haas Motion”) (D.I. 2478); and

WHEREAS, to the extent that the Haas Motion is a claim on behalf of Mr. Haas as an individual, that claim is barred because it was filed almost a decade after the Bar Date and Mr. Haas has been actively involved in this case and never asserted any individual claim; and

...

WHEREAS, Mr. Haas’ numerous filings in this case are repetitive, without merit, and border on harassment;

....

ORDERED, that the Haas Motion is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED, that any further pleadings filed by Mr. Haas in this case shall be deemed stricken; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk’s Office is hereby directed to return, without docketing, any further pleadings which Mr. Haas may file in this case.


http://wtsglobal.com/newsletters/the-vexatious-litigant/

Anyone in the professions concerned with dispute resolution will eventually encounter the claimant – rigid and suspicious but perhaps initially ingratiating – who often appears with many documents, pleading or demanding that they be read. On inspection the arguments are poorly constructed and often confusing and rambling. Excessive highlighting and underlining are common, as well as many attachments, often of no relevance to the case or touting broad principles of human rights. They may utterly deny obvious undisputed facts known to others. Although they certainly may engage in conscious lying, fundamentally it is more the case of a passionate belief in the truth of their perceptions. Personal blogs, chat room dialogue reinforcing their perceptions, and other internet activity will accompany their quest.

No, Steve, they found your filings abusive jberryhill Dec 2012 #1
You must be in the wrong Thread (or need I refer you to Young Guns the Movie) laserhaas Dec 2012 #2
That's the order that the court issued jberryhill Dec 2012 #3
Down goes Frazier! Orrex Dec 2012 #4
ENlighten Me? laserhaas Dec 2012 #6
It was a famous Howard Cosel call Lasher Dec 2012 #11
I am well aware. However, your succinct comment is not conclusive. Are you implying laserhaas Dec 2012 #14
Sorry, Your Majesty Laser Lasher Dec 2012 #17
By analogy... Orrex Dec 2012 #29
NO - you ARE disrespectful by addressing me other than Laser. Should I call you HillBillyBerry? WTF? laserhaas Dec 2012 #5
Well, the problem there is.... jberryhill Dec 2012 #7
We are NOT in court and you will get NO further response from me unless you address me as Laser laserhaas Dec 2012 #9
"it is logical that you are only biased against Laser Haas" jberryhill Dec 2012 #12
again - it is Laser. You are playing games. Be sincere - or be never here! laserhaas Dec 2012 #15
He is chanelling his inner Bob Dole :) - n/t coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #18
:0p laserhaas Dec 2012 #21
you can call me Al ! snooper2 Dec 2012 #35
Your arguments are far from dispositive. laserhaas Dec 2012 #8
Ummm, Laser, That's not an "argument" jberryhill Dec 2012 #10
You are being disingenuous. If you looked at the pleading and the evidence - but you still come away laserhaas Dec 2012 #13
It's the same thing that anyone has said... jberryhill Dec 2012 #16
You state falsehoods and appear to be utilizing GOP Bible 101 - by putting words in my mouth. laserhaas Dec 2012 #19
My ilk? jberryhill Dec 2012 #24
Aaaaand he's out! Lasher Dec 2012 #27
You make some good points but I take issue with your reference to lawyers. Jim Lane Dec 2012 #28
Good point - de minimus non curat lex jberryhill Dec 2012 #30
You have many errant presumptions in your logic. laserhaas Dec 2012 #32
This has to rank as one of the most absurd and\or most hilarious coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #20
TY - but patience is not my trait - it is my only option laserhaas Dec 2012 #23
He wasn't referring to you jberryhill Dec 2012 #31
Signed Heathen57 Dec 2012 #22
To be honest with you -'signed' - I think she is between a Rock & Hard Place. The System is wretched laserhaas Dec 2012 #25
by the way - my mistake, my put'r screen was over viewing. I thought your name was 'signed" laserhaas Dec 2012 #26
Americans just don't want to know what goes on every day in this nation. Egalitarian Thug Dec 2012 #33
It is neither your, nor I, that are the problem 'Egalitarian Thug' - for we stand apart of the crowd laserhaas Dec 2012 #36
. RomneyLies Dec 2012 #34
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Judge Rules evidence of R...»Reply #1