Re: 11/8/01 - [ABF] Judge Denies Airborne Express Motion for New Trial
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF FRESNO
No. 01CE0001592 Dept. 33
,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
AIRBORNE EXPRESS, INC., Plaintiff, v
TERENCE MOORE, aka paladinrodentcontrol, and DOES 1 through 100 inclusive, Defendant
On November 1, 2001, the motion for new trial of plaintiff Airborne Express, Inc. ("Airborne") came on for hearing in Department 33 of the above-referenced court, the Hon. Mark W. Snauffer, Judge, presiding. Plaintiff Airborne appeared by its attorney, David R. McNamara, and defendant Terence Moore ("Moore") appeared by his counsel, James C. Sherwood. The Court, having considered the moving and opposition papers filed by counsel, and the arguments of counsel, took the matter under submission on November 1, 2001. The Court denies the motion for new trial of plaintiff for the following reasons:
For purposes of clarification, as requested by plaintiff's counsel, the court, following the August 10 hearing, found that plaintiff did not demonstrate by admissible evidence a probability that plaintiff would succeed in obtaining any relief, including injunctive relief pursuant to the third cause of action for unfair competition. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(b); Church of Scientology v. Wollersham (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 628, 655.)
The Court further notes that at the time of the hearing on August 10, 2001, there was no motion by plaintiff to file a first amended complaint, a notice of motion without accompanying points and authorities and a proposed amended pleading being legally insufficient. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 312(a), 313(a), and 327(a).) In addition, there was no request by plaintiff for a continuance of the hearing on the defendant's motion to strike, nor was there a request for further discovery to be taken prior to the hearing.
On the pleadings and all admissible evidence presented to the Court as of August 10, 2001, the Court believes that the motion to strike was properly granted, and therefore, the plaintiff's motion for new trial is denied.
DATED this 8th day of November.2001
MARK W. SNAUFFER
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Aren't you stock holders happy that Airborne has spent over a $100,000 to make my drival stop???
Isn't anyone curious why the crooks won't sue me for Defamation??
The IC's know about the stealing...they feel Airborne's hands on their wallet every day..
What goes around will come around..
The RICO Class Action is alive and well in Texas
messages.yahoo.com
=====
Re: Moore 3 Airborne ZERO
by: advancedlax 11/15/01 08:27 pm
Msg: 13407 of 13409
Most of us could really care less.
We've already said our "Good-byes" to you..
messages.yahoo.com
=====
Re: Moore 3 Airborne ZERO
by: defend1stamend 11/16/01 12:30 am
Msg: 13408 of 13409
First of all, congratulations Terry.
Next, to everyone attempting to put Terry down, don't you think that you are targeting the wrong person?
Think about it. Airborne has sued him several times for numerous issues. NOT ONCE have they won on any of their causes of action.
If you believe that Terry is an idiot, (which I do not), wouldn't it be best to use your power as a shareholder to let the Board of Directors, etc know that they should not be wasting YOUR money on trying to get him to shut up by engaging in fruitless lawsuits?
Along those lines, answer Terrys question - why does Airborne sue him for everything EXCEPT slander/defamation, etc. The answer is simple. They can't. A defamation suit would open up the plaintiff to all kinds of depositions. It is too risky to be putting upper management under oath. Airborne knows this - that is why they are resorting to wasting YOUR money on other BS lawsuits, whose sole purpose is to attempt and cause his insurance company that is protecting him from said lawsuits to drop their legal coverage on him.
If you want to do yourself, and all other shareholders a favor - tell Airborne to ignore Terry, there are many other things that this money can be used for rather than chasing after lawsuits they have no chance of winning, and are soley being used as harrasment towards Terry.
On the other hand - if you really believe Terry is a threat to Airborne by "defaming" key persons, with the power of your shares as a shareholder request they go after him for defamation. Guaranteed this will never happen.
Finally, you "Terry bashers" are mis-directing your anger. Terry is not causing this company to go under. It is mismanagement. These lawsuits are a prime example of this.
messages.yahoo.com
=====
Re: Moore 3 Airborne ZERO
by: mechan36
Long-Term Sentiment: Strong Sell 11/16/01 02:01 am
Msg: 13409 of 13409
Well said, I guess you can't keep a good man down. Give them hell, Mr. Moore.
I can't believe all of the time and energy that Airbonre is spending on a single individual. If they would only put 1/2 this time and energy in running the company, they would be in much better position now.
This is the result of too many ABF corporate attorneys with nothing better to do. And too many ABF managers/executives checking this Yahoo Board every hour instead of Doing Something that benefits the company!
messages.yahoo.com |
