Karaoke Forums

I understand Mr. Harrington's mission and I support it. Harrington doesn't start threads with the intent of stirring the pot. In fact I don't recall him starting any thread ever. He responds to posts that contain mis-information and attempts to correct it. You should know this since he has corrected you a number of times. He has even corrected me.

I don't care all that much for the posts about the lawsuits which include InsaneKJ's posts. They are a lot less informative than people give them credit for and really don't clear things up as evidenced by the continued back and forth on both sides. The posts never bring the two sides closer together, and never end well. They are divisive and polarizing and I think they have a negative impact on the forum as a whole. More often than not, people use them as an "I told you so!" message which the other side then picks apart.

_________________
-Chris

Chris - Did you even read Brophy's allegations? Did you read the findings of courts as supplied in Mr. McLaughlin's declaration I linked to above and the basis on which Judge Wright found Slep-tone to be acting in bad faith? Do you see any connection there? Just because these cases do not interest YOU, doesn't mean they are of no interest to others. The world doesn't revolve around you Chris. At well over 4,000 posts in less that three years, that is an average of about four posts every single day on this forum for this entire period. Seems to me that you should stop reading and posting in this section if it gets you so frustrated, "unless you have nothing better to do."

Is Jim really correcting? Isn't more like he is a spin doctor, trying desperately to keep his aggressive client in the best possible light?

Since we are throwing out stats.....

Your most active forum - Legalities where 72% of your posts reside.
1/3 of your posts made are in a single thread in legalities

My most active forum - Karaoke Discussions where 38% of my posts reside.
I spend far less time in this section than you suggest.

No - I have not read the case. I have only read a few of the cases posted by either side. They don't impact or pertain to anything I do or for that matter any of us do.

Furthermore, as you pointed out, they are allegations. What is claimed in just about any legal case is designed to be as salacious and damning as possible. Its a part of the game that is played by lawyers on behalf of their clients.

I realize some the cases might be of interest to some, but I still question....why? The only cases I have any real interest in are the ones between the rights holders and the karaoke companies because they actually impact everyone involved in the karaoke industry.

Some dispute between Sound Choice and another KJ.....or SC and an attorney firm that worked for them.....or SC and an investigator that worked for them.....none of those impact me, you, or any other KJ that isn't a party to the suit.

_________________
-Chris

Spoken like a true spin doctor.....

_________________
-Chris

Chris - Your statistics and argument about them are meaningless. That you have read only what Slep-tone or Jimbo states, speaks volumes. There are plenty of other threads and forum categories here. Go "play hard" there if this one bothers you so much.

Why are my stats meaningless but yours valid?

I listen to what Kurt and James have to say about things that matter to me (and generally any karaoke host). What Kurt and James and you and Lone Ranger and InsaneKJ and a myriad of other people have to say about other lawsuits frankly isn't very interesting to me.

THIS little tangent came about because of the jab I made regarding how you spend your time. Really has nothing to do with the lawsuits at all. That was in fact, my first comment in this thread.

So my final comment before I take your advice and step away from this thread......SC and Brophy can duke it out, and one of them might actually win. The end result either way.....no impact on the karaoke industry or any karaoke hosts. This case has nothing to do with KJ's and won't impact KJ's.

Now.....heading to Scribd......to see if I can find any books about fake lawyers.

_________________
-Chris

Here I am chiding Insane for being too cheap to mention, but not post Brophy's counterclaim. Here it is.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/236910930/Brophy-Counterclaim

As most of you know, I make it a policy not to comment on pending cases.

I will, however, point out that statements made in legal pleadings are immune from prosecution as defamation of character, no matter how false or defamatory they might be.

They are not, however, immune from prosecution when they are further published by others.

If the legal pleadings are proved true what then Jim? Wouldn't any counter suing done on the defendant's part have to be done after the trial is completed? How does it feel to get dragged through the mud and your reputation tarnished? You did that to others, that is why you have to be able to take it, as well as dish it out. Now you and Kurt are the one's under a cloud until you can prove your not guilty as charged. I can see why you have to keep working on the defense since you are up to your hat band in this.

Played nicely into my hand as I saved $3.00!

_________________
-- Mark

You must squeak when you walk Insane. Since you have saved so much maybe you could lend a little to Jim and Kurt, you don't have an extra $300,000.00 laying around do you? I wouldn't count on them paying you back to soon, since they seem to be a little short right now.

Saved you another few nickels here Insane. Slep-tone's answer is here. The admissions and exhibit are interesting.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/236917956/Sle ... unterclaim

It is amusing that there was no answer to Brophy's counterclaim filed on behalf of Kurt Slep or James Harrington. Amusing too that they likely are intending to rely on Brophy's service of the counterclaim to James Harrington as counsel for Slep-tone (i.e. that Slep and Jimbo were never served). Three days ago, the judge has dismissed Brophy's first count for failure to respond to Slep-tone's motion to dismiss it. Brophy is learning fast that traps exist for the inexperienced pro per.

I'm trying to make sense of your word salad here.

As you know, anytime new parties are brought into a case through, for example, a counterclaim, formal service on those parties is required. I was personally served only this week, and Kurt has not yet been served. As such, there is no need for us to appear yet individually.

I honestly couldn't care less that Mr. Brophy has named me as a defendant. I suppose if the allegations were actually true I would be bothered, but not for the reason you suggest.

I do find it amusing that your perception that I am in some kind of difficulty gives you such an obvious boner.

What I find so amusing Jim, is how quickly former business partners and allies start pointing the finger at each other, once the love is gone. If the erection lasts more than 4 hours I'll see a doctor, after I put it to good use of course.


P.S. Some of the accusations are pretty serious Jim, especially about legal practices, and disciplinary actions, which should be easy to prove since they would be a matter of public record.


Wait a minute Jim you admit number 11 all of it even the "Slep stated that Slep-Tone did not have the MONEY to pay a retainer". That was 4 years ago Jim, and you want us to believe SC is financially solvent. You didn't even have $20,000.00 to start the legal process ball rolling?

I have never been disciplined by any bar authority. You are welcome to examine my record at the North Carolina State Bar (ncbar.gov; click on Discipline, then Disciplinary Orders, and search my name), which is the only state bar of which I am a member. You will see that my record is clean.

The allegations are not "serious" in any real sense, because they are untrue. Even if they were true, they would be irrelevant to the case. Perhaps most importantly, I had absolutely nothing to do with the arrangement between Slep-Tone and Mr. Brophy, other than that well before that agreement I hired Mr. Brophy to execute service of process on a couple of defendants in Arizona. I never even spoke to Mr. Brophy after that, and certainly not about Slep-Tone hiring his company. The main purpose of the allegations seems to be an attempt to bring me into the suit in order to disqualify me as counsel for Slep-Tone.

So does that mean you admit count number 11? That Slep-Tone did not have the means 4 years ago to pay APS's $20,000.00 retainer?

And as the OP states, it took SC to serve Brophy through publication as he allegedly was dodging being served!

I wonder what HE had to hide!

_________________
-- Mark