juanphordimoni and thoughts on martin and lawyer

[Designer]

Sterling is being Chizzled by Frizzle
« Thread started on: Today at 12:31pm » <br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know if my friend Sterling (I've been one of your staunchest supporters through my many different "names" for the last 2 years) knows how business is carried on in a court of law. The business that is on the docket for that particular day (what has been filed with the court) is what the business will be . To illustrate.........Let's say you have to go to court to sue your ex-wife for not paying child support. After court is in session, you whisper to your attorney that you've decided that you want full custody of your children. It doesn't matter if you've already brought "pleadings" about this matter to submit to the judge. He ain't gonna accept it. Your wife's attorney is gonna object and be royally sustained. You can't do this. The April 25 Federal Court hearing is going to include ONLY what is on the court calendar for Urban, CMKX, whatever was in the Federal Court filings. Martin and Frizzell know this. They can't bring in a separate pleading on behalf of the shareholders on naked shorting or whatever.........They're using their appearance on April 25 and that "contract" that was so carefully crafted......as a way to back in to a very possible class-action lawsuit. Mark my words. They'll report back in detail about the court proceedings........Frizzell is gonna be on pal-talk to answer all of your questions........what a great guy. Mr. Sterling.........You and the $25 supporters of this "intervention" on your behalf are gonna feel so USED. Martin and Frizzell are "first in" on any class-action lawsuit. That's what they've already tried to gain interest in months ago......You want to know the real truth? They're already in. And I've got my mouse clicker warmed up for submitting my online grievance to the State Bar of Texas........when I am proved right. FYI.....If only a certain amount of people sign on to the class-action.....and these saints will control that aspect.....why this little honey of a deal can be played out right near their hometown of Tyler........In Texas. The new Class-Action legislation for 2005 that Bush just signed.......is no problem.......you only have to keep the number of plaintiffs that sign on (I ain't talkin' about the "contract" for the hearing) within a certain number range.......no problemo. Then...... we can do this in Federal court in say..................Houston, Texas. It's so much more convenient than Washington. Maybe if enough people complain about what's happening here, these guys will tell everyone that I'm full of it and class- action was never their intent. Lawyers always have a way out of situations that make it look like they never intended to do what they really intended to do. As Charles Barkley said......"I could be wrong.....but I'm probably not".

« Last Edit: Today at 12:43pm by juanphordimoni » <br>

[Designer]

Started by juanphordimoni | Post by juanphordimoni
It looks to me that the whole Martin-Frizzel Schizzel ain't nuthin' but a back-door future class-action lawsuit by one (or two attorneys) who more or less failed to gain support for a class-action lawsuit involving CMKX a few months back. Even Dr. Diamond ain't too happy about this thinly-veiled charade. Let me tell you one thing, Mr. Martin and Mr. Frizzel Schizzel Esquire.......Your two-bit contract with its legal-eze is NOT going to speak for ME. Your solicitation for money from ME to represent ME--whether I agree with it or not--in a legal issue that you have been trying to get involved in-- is going to see BOTH of you in front of your local Grievance Board of the State Bar of Texas quicker than you can say "Ambulance Chaser". If you aren't aware of the recent policy of the Grievance Board in the State of Texas, let me tell you something from a personal experience. My ex-wife hired an attorney. I had paid the same attorney for a consultation about the same matter a year earlier. I told the attorney not to appear in court. He laughed and did anyway. I filed a grievance. He laughed. His attorney wife was on the local board in Montgomery County. What he didn't know is that once a grievance is filed, the attorney HAS to appear before the Grievance Board. No review to see if the grievance has merit. That is decided at the "trial" before the local board. The attorney's name, case title, and date of his appearance before the board is published in the monthly Texas Bar Journal. Long story short. Laughter actually turned to tears at the hearing. I got wifey and TWO associates removed from the board and replaced for the hearing. What I'm saying, Martin and Swizzle.........You go ahead and do what I think you're gonna try to do......and tie-up everybody's shares----especially my shares-----and you're gonna have a crying date in a local attorney's conference room (with video camera(State Bar's), lawyers that I guarantee you will not know,,,,,,and me. You might listen to the end of Dr. D's latest MP-3. You two are the unpopular stars. Grievance will be the least of your troubles with me. An attorney with offices in the Marathon Oil Building on San Felipe St. in Houston, who has been known to successfully sue other attorneys............will be standing by. If you think I'm Jokin', you must be tokin'............IMHO....LSMFT.....KPRCTV.....AARP!!!

[Designer]

Started by juanphordimoni | Post by juanphordimoni
For those of you who are concerned about an attorney "protecting the CMKX shareholders' interests".........and perhaps Pi##### off the honorable federal judge babe.......let me relate a true story that took place on national television in November of 2000. To make a very long story short.....the Presidential election was being thrown into the courts. As I recall, one of the first stops was to a district, federal, kangaroo, whatever.....court in Florida. The presiding judge was a Republican appointee. After the court was called to order, a POS (my opinion) attorney named Larry Klayman approached the bench. The judge, with a southern drawl almost as pronounced as mine, asked him what he wanted. Larry said that he represented Judicial Watch and was at the proceedings representing voters of some persuasion (whatever......it doesn't really matter). The judge asked Larry if he had any official business relationship with either side. Larry said no (or words to that effect) he was representing Judicial Watch and was there to observe blah blah blah.......The judge told Larry that he had no business with the court in the election matter and to (more or less) get the he## out of my court. Now Larry, at the time (I don't know what his leanings are at present), was a Neo-Conservative Gore, Clinton, et al., hater. The Judge was a rather radical Republican himself. The hearing on April 25 has a specific purpose. There are 2 sides that are to be present to argue, present, yell, cry, or whatever. The Fuzzy Law Dude's Washington attorney has absolutely NO official business with the court in this matter. There is NO reason to represent the interests of the CMKX shareholders in this particular matter. Go ahead. Pi## off the bodacious federal judge. Make Urban look bad. Inept. Possibly not trusted by his stockholders. The Fuzzy Law Dude won't be able to just take his seat and observe incognito.......His intentions have already been splattered over the internet. He'll have the neon flashing arrow on his head pointing to his butt. What a bunch of ill-advised lemmings........and at $25 a head.........IMHO....LSMFT....KPRCTV.....AARP.

[Designer]

newcmkx.proboards33.com/index.cgi?action=usersrecentposts&user=juanphordimoni