Why do some lawyers try to confuse the Courts instead of challenging the issues?
In Federal case #4:06-cv-38, ED TN, the lawyers are complaining about a son helping his dad fight for a Fair and MEANINGFUL day in court. His dad’s former lawyer did not do his job. He allowed perjury to be committed- A legal malpractice & civil rights case. But because the COMMON SENSE papers the son has helped his dad with, the lawyers argue about technicalities instead of whether or not the former lawyers committed the crimes which is alleged in the lawsuit. .6 million dollars is at risk. Lawyer’s insurance companies have said the lawyers will not be able to get any insurance after this case is finished regardless of the outcome. So what does that say? So why do lawyers argue about "Wild Goose Chasing" instead of the actual claims? Are they scared their GUILT will be determined so soon? COMMON SENSE Will Convict the Guilty Lawyers in this case regardless of Wild Goose Chasing. If you want to help preserve real Justice, contact kfluna (at) gmail.com.
Tagged with: 6 million • amp • civil rights case • common sense • crimes • cv • dad • federal case • guilt • insurance • insurance companies • lawyer • lawyers • legal malpractice • million dollars • perjury • real justice • risk • technicalities • wild goose
Filed under: Legal Malpractice
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
AND the reason you put this in auto racing is ? perhaps the name "wild goose chasing? – sound’s like there is more to this story then is printed here.
This is quite possibly the best auto racing question ever asked. Thanks!