Jamie Thomas savage asfffff thread deleted?

[SkatetheRipper]

Expand Quote

Keep posting the pleadings, but doesn't leaking potentially inadmissible evidence violate attorney ethics?

[close]

If that's the case Wendler really is the dumbest lawyer i can recall of late. He must be a Cooley alumni.

Maybe? And that would be pretty stupid of him if that were the case. Although a quick search through his LinkedIn shows that he's passed 5 bar exams so he must not be that dumb?

[Donkey Lips]

As a long time fan of JT's work it's pretty shitty to read all of this.

It's surprising, right? After more than 20 years of professional skateboarding Jamie the Christ Child Thomas has never once triggered controversy.

[SkatetheRipper]

Expand Quote

As a long time fan of JT's work it's pretty shitty to read all of this.

[close]

It's surprising, right? After more than 20 years of professional skateboarding Jamie the Christ Child Thomas has never once triggered controversy.

LOL I hear you. Have there been other lawsuits??

[Chavo]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Keep posting the pleadings, but doesn't leaking potentially inadmissible evidence violate attorney ethics?

[close]

If that's the case Wendler really is the dumbest lawyer i can recall of late. He must be a Cooley alumni.

[close]

No. You can do whatever you want pretty much.  You'd have to argue they're trying to taint a potential jury pool or something, which isn't an issue here, on this case, on this scale, it's not even close. That's generally a crim thing anyway, I've never even see that come up in a civil trial. Admissibility doesn't have anything to do with anything until you're trying to testify or publish something to a jury. 

He's pro se in California because he's not licensed to practice law in California. Everyone is entitled to represent themselves though. You can only practice in states where you're licensed / have taken the bar exam. Federal Court is easier because it's fairly uniform...exactly the same with respect to civil procedure.

Isucks' dec is weird in that it appears Crossroads is a forfeited entity...so it runs to him....but, it sounds like he wasn't individually served, so Florida dude is still going to have to do that. Still think this winds up in SoCal.   

Maybe he can file an application for himself to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

[rlang]

Maybe he can file an application for himself to appear as counsel pro hac vice.

He doesn't need to. You can represent yourself for nothing...other than the appearance fee. For Pro hoc vice you have to get local counsel to vouch for you and pay a couple hundred bucks...there's no reason to.

[Esmith5488]

At first I wasn’t on the chiefs side, after further review the other dude somehow is the bigger kook.

[GAY]

hahahhaa I made it

[Jud Nestorkins]

JAMIE SUXXX!

[winecrab]

Isuck is a g. Putting out his cold war part with the Impossible grind down clipper at 39 while having a family, running a business and having nothing left to prove is sick. He can rip me off and sue me any time.

[Bitter]

[tension]

i knew all business was conducted via instagram

[tortfeasor]

ive given a lot of legal of advice over the years that i think is relevant here--  i have some canned statements that i use often like "make sure the squeeze is worth the juice" and "principle is expensive and you can't eat it" or "less is more,"  even simple general things like "you cant unring the bell" can apply here ...
but what i really think the best legal advice anyone could give to all parties in this situation is this... "holy shit- what are you doing? just stop fucking talking. just shut up. keep your shit off the internet. keep your shit out of other peoples mouths.  instabeef is not a good look for professionals, you are sabotaging yourself, you are gonna blow a lot more than this tiny case, grow up and fix this like adults."

and thats my legal take.

[50mm]

ive given a lot of legal of advice over the years that i think is relevant here--  i have some canned statements that i use often like "make sure the squeeze is worth the juice" and "principle is expensive and you can't eat it" or "less is more,"  even simple general things like "you cant unring the bell" can apply here ...
but what i really think the best legal advice anyone could give to all parties in this situation is this... "holy shit- what are you doing? just stop fucking talking. just shut up. keep your shit off the internet. keep your shit out of other peoples mouths.  instabeef is not a good look for professionals, you are sabotaging yourself, you are gonna blow a lot more than this tiny case, grow up and fix this like adults."

and thats my legal take.

Does the way this is being handled have an effect on a judge presiding over the case? Or is that more Of a problem where the merit of a case is already kind of on the fringe? I’m sure my terms are not accurate but I mean if a judge see’s someone essentially saying “I’m gonna take you down, you shouldn’t have fucked with me” can that effect the case? Or is that how all lawyers essentially do business and it just comes with the territory?

[Francis Xavier]

It's two kids fighting over toys, and letting the world know how much of a dick the other is.

[rlang]

It's not a big deal. Everyone engaged in litigation usually doesn't like the other side. And every single document is already available to anyone with a PACER account (me).

[tortfeasor]

Expand Quote

ive given a lot of legal of advice over the years that i think is relevant here--  i have some canned statements that i use often like "make sure the squeeze is worth the juice" and "principle is expensive and you can't eat it" or "less is more,"  even simple general things like "you cant unring the bell" can apply here ...
but what i really think the best legal advice anyone could give to all parties in this situation is this... "holy shit- what are you doing? just stop fucking talking. just shut up. keep your shit off the internet. keep your shit out of other peoples mouths.  instabeef is not a good look for professionals, you are sabotaging yourself, you are gonna blow a lot more than this tiny case, grow up and fix this like adults."

and thats my legal take.

[close]

Does the way this is being handled have an effect on a judge presiding over the case? Or is that more Of a problem where the merit of a case is already kind of on the fringe? I’m sure my terms are not accurate but I mean if a judge see’s someone essentially saying “I’m gonna take you down, you shouldn’t have fucked with me” can that effect the case? Or is that how all lawyers essentially do business and it just comes with the territory?

its not so much the impact it will have on the judge (judges generally just decide law), most good judges just roll their eyes and focus on whats actually important.  maybe it  will sway a jury a few bucks on the outcome- but the general rule is if a case goes to a jury someone (could be a lawyer, could be a client) made a bad call somewhere.  its really more about the impact causing mud will have on the other side of the "v".
Cases start off really hot, but 90 percent of the time there is a lull somewhere near the end where people become willing to sit at the table, talk with each other and hash it out.  When that opportunity presents itself a lot of really good work can be done that will save everyone time, money, and stress. plus it eliminates risk for everyone.  i love jury trials but its a huge risk for the client, and consumes their lives.  trial is rarely the best option for clients.  picking a fight and taking pot shots really just hinders your chance at easy success and resolving before trial. its self sabotage.



edit: what i am talking about is really more about civil disputes than criminal issues.

[getdatshrimp]

i would love to know what's going on here..


but what the fuck's going on with the guy? selling signed iphone cases? boards that are not rare/special by any means with someone elses poetry written on the grip? you can tell the guy's ego is out of control if you look at any of the garage days items for sale.

  He once did something that kind of rubbed me the wrong way.  There is a secret halfpipe built in the mountains  of Vancouver island on a dank peninsula. Built by the late great Jaime Collins painstakingly over a few years.   Anyway, the cheif takes a photo of himself doing a melon to fakie and puts in on a shirt.  Woulda' bin cool if he atleast reached out to JC"s island based board company INSTRUMENTAL that was still going on. And done a collab.  Maybe i'm being a little salty.  Was cool to see some respect on Collins name from and o.g

[givecigstosurfgroms]

Expand Quote

i would love to know what's going on here..


but what the fuck's going on with the guy? selling signed iphone cases? boards that are not rare/special by any means with someone elses poetry written on the grip? you can tell the guy's ego is out of control if you look at any of the garage days items for sale.

[close]

  He once did something that kind of rubbed me the wrong way.  There is a secret halfpipe built in the mountains  of Vancouver island on a dank peninsula. Built by the late great Jaime Collins painstakingly over a few years.   Anyway, the cheif takes a photo of himself doing a melon to fakie and puts in on a shirt.  Woulda' bin cool if he atleast reached out to JC"s island based board company INSTRUMENTAL that was still going on. And done a collab.  Maybe i'm being a little salty.  Was cool to see some respect on Collins name from and o.g

Skated with him quite a bit.  Talented and authentic.

[links, pics, and quotes]

At first I wasn’t on the chiefs side, after further review the other dude somehow is the bigger kook.

[links, pics, and quotes]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

ive given a lot of legal of advice over the years that i think is relevant here--  i have some canned statements that i use often like "make sure the squeeze is worth the juice" and "principle is expensive and you can't eat it" or "less is more,"  even simple general things like "you cant unring the bell" can apply here ...
but what i really think the best legal advice anyone could give to all parties in this situation is this... "holy shit- what are you doing? just stop fucking talking. just shut up. keep your shit off the internet. keep your shit out of other peoples mouths.  instabeef is not a good look for professionals, you are sabotaging yourself, you are gonna blow a lot more than this tiny case, grow up and fix this like adults."

and thats my legal take.

[close]

Does the way this is being handled have an effect on a judge presiding over the case? Or is that more Of a problem where the merit of a case is already kind of on the fringe? I’m sure my terms are not accurate but I mean if a judge see’s someone essentially saying “I’m gonna take you down, you shouldn’t have fucked with me” can that effect the case? Or is that how all lawyers essentially do business and it just comes with the territory?

[close]

its not so much the impact it will have on the judge (judges generally just decide law), most good judges just roll their eyes and focus on whats actually important.  maybe it  will sway a jury a few bucks on the outcome- but the general rule is if a case goes to a jury someone (could be a lawyer, could be a client) made a bad call somewhere.  its really more about the impact causing mud will have on the other side of the "v".
Cases start off really hot, but 90 percent of the time there is a lull somewhere near the end where people become willing to sit at the table, talk with each other and hash it out.  When that opportunity presents itself a lot of really good work can be done that will save everyone time, money, and stress. plus it eliminates risk for everyone.  i love jury trials but its a huge risk for the client, and consumes their lives.  trial is rarely the best option for clients.  picking a fight and taking pot shots really just hinders your chance at easy success and resolving before trial. its self sabotage.

edit: what i am talking about is really more about civil disputes than criminal issues.

[Esmith5488]

Expand Quote

At first I wasn’t on the chiefs side, after further review the other dude somehow is the bigger kook.

[close]

Haha, dude I would have never seen this. That rules

[Shifty Flip]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

At first I wasn’t on the chiefs side, after further review the other dude somehow is the bigger kook.

[close]

[close]

Haha, dude I would have never seen this. That rules

Mods, please change Esmith5488s name to BIGGERKook immediately, and move all LAWendlers posts into whatever land automatically going forward. Thanks in advance.

[Pete]

Carpet is the shit.

Why would anyone want to pay 50k for old zero boards and sweaty fallen t-shirts anyway. Both losers.

Free max b

[Esmith5488]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

At first I wasn’t on the chiefs side, after further review the other dude somehow is the bigger kook.

[close]

[close]

Haha, dude I would have never seen this. That rules

[close]

Mods, please change Esmith5488s name to BIGGERKook immediately, and move all LAWendlers posts into whatever land automatically going forward. Thanks in advance.

I’m honestly fine with all of the above

[links, pics, and quotes]

[links, pics, and quotes]

[shannamal]

i'm going to be honest, i still don't get what this is about. that said, very glad they took it to instagram like real men.

[moonordie]

i'm going to be honest, i still don't get what this is about. that said, very glad they took it to instagram like real men.

I laughed harder than I expected with that.

[links, pics, and quotes]

[Cool Ceith]

Wow, Jamie Thomas really has zero integrity.