JB:
Any way you can post a PDF of the trial transcript on the Board or in the Archives?
It goes like this\"
Plaintiff: \"You ripped me off, you son of a bitch!!\"
Defendant: \"Did not.\"
Judge: \"Did so. Pay the man 25 G\'s.\"
Defendant: \"Ha ha, typical fees.\"
Plaintiff: \"We\'re appealing.\"
Something like that.... lol
You are under the impression that the Paintsville court actually has transcripts.
The judge actually works off the notes he takes on a pad (not kidding). They do videotape testimony, we are waiting for a copy so we can get it transcribed and decide about appealing (very likely).
I made a general statement about this that will appear in Throroughbred Daily News soon, otherwise keeping my mouth shut on specifics. Too much at stake here, not just for me, but for everyone who does business in this industry.
Here, courtesy of the Paulick Report, is a link to the judge\'s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgment:
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BwOmWr6p2atRZDcxZjI2YjctNDE5MC00MTZmLWI1ZWEtNGQ1ZGM2MGFjMTQw&hl=en
Weighing in a 33 pages, it has a pretty extensive summary of the testimony, at least the way the judge heard it.
Thanks Bit.
A very informative read.
Not so much. I have to find out what I can and can\'t say here, but I have 19 (literally-- NINETEEN) things listed that are wrong with that ruling, most in terms of recitation of the testified-to facts by the judge, some by omission.
LIKE-- he has a throw-away reference to Brauer reading an email FROM ME in his testimony. In fact, he read an email he wrote TO ME, saying among other things that Lauffer had tried mutiple times to cut me out of the deal, which the judge does not mention. The email was written just 3 weeks after the events, well before there was even a lawsuit.
LIKE-- the judge completely leaves out our cross examination of their expert witness, Headley Bell, in his acount-- he has direct AND cross for all other witnesses. Yes, under direct he was a good witness for them. When we crossed, not so much.
LIKE-- the judge saying I testified I \"did not have any information that Mr. Kirk told the fees to the Plaintiff\". That would be true if he had added \"except for the email that went into evidence from Kirk to Brown saying \'I have told them of your commissions and other rates\'\".
Much, much more, but I have to be careful.
I don\'t think you should be saying anything in this forum. Granted, we all want you to have a successful appeal with the results you expect, but for guys to be asking you to talk about the previous case just isn\'t right.
As you\'re aware, there are so many technicalites involved in the law it would be a shame to compromise your impending appeal.
Personally, I don\'t have a need to know what was or wasn\'t said during the trial.
Just know the guys in the room are in your corner and hope you get what you feel you deserve.
Guys, quit asking questions, okay? TGJB can enlighten us when the time is right.
Well, here\'s a topic where I actually have some expertise and some unsolicited advice. I hope this doesn\'t come off as presumptious, but I\'m sure your lawyer has or will advise you to be extremely careful (as you previously noted) of what you post here, or anywhere for that matter. In general, it\'s not a good idea to discuss a pending claim or appeal (except with your lawyer) and I would be careful citing any factual deficiencies in the ruling - particularly in a venue like Paintsvile, KY, if for no other reason, you don\'t want to provide any insight into your strategy to the other side. I would book any action that opposing counsel is keeping a close eye on \"Ask the Experts\". Best of luck on any appeal.
Delete this thread.
moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Delete this thread.
Good idea. Don\'t give the other side nuthin\'.
We\'re not. They were at the trial and know what the testimony was. Appeal strategy is another matter.