timberlea wrote:
Well to use the anti SC language, this ruling doesn't matter because there was no trial. The anti SC said the suits against those who didn't show up wasn't a court "ruling". Using their definition, this wasn't either. Like you said, until a judge and/or jury make a decision, it's nothing. So Cip hasn't been proven right.
If you had read the begining of this thread you would know that the point of the discussion was that Chip predicted Soundchioce would run from the Las Vegas lawyers, and that was in fact the result in spite of Harringtonlaw insisting otherwise and claiming that the soundchoice
Harrintonlaw wrote:
attorneys handling that case have it well in hand. They have made a response that the court will consider. There are not any missed calendar events of consequence, and sadly--for you--the motions are not going to be granted by default.
All of which proved to be
completely false!So indeed Chip was proven right and you have just proven something else about yourself with your comment.
c. staley wrote:
nice try