WBCCI Board Lawsuit

[LI Pets]

"I have thought a lot about why people get so hostile online, and I have come to believe it is primarily because we live in a society with a hypertrophied sense of justice and an atrophied sense of humility and charity, to put the matter in terms of the classic virtues. ... In our online debates, we not only fail to cultivate charity and humility, we come to think of them as vices: forms of weakness that compromise our advocacy. And so we go forth to war with one another."

--Alan Jacobs,
professor of English at Wheaton College

writing at Big Questions Online.

[eubank]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

"I have thought a lot about why people get so hostile online, and I have come to believe ..."
--Alan Jacobs,
professor of English at Wheaton College writing at Big Questions Online.

Or the online disinhibition effect:

Online disinhibition effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Lynn

[xrvr]

The money is held in escrow until the still possibility of a lawsuit has passed. Please be patient and give this process a chance, and then if necessary pursue getting the money back. zz

[wheel interested]

You speak as if you have more than public knowlege. Unfortunately "be patient" was the exact response to our questions of how the lawsuit filing was coming along up until the very day it was announced that it would not be forthcoming and that it had been a done deal of negotiation weeks and weeks before that disclosure, all the while feigning progress in filing even in the 11th hour long after it was assuredly not to be the eventuality but was a contrivance of diversion. I was thinking when I donated funds that the lawsuit would be served before the International of this year, certainly assuming action for Leo's reinstatement and the redress of election inpropriaties and forum security breeches, before the end of Leo's expulsion period and the WBCCI leadership year. How many proposed years will the escrow fund be held and what is the process of naming a schedule for its return or end date and do supporters have any input in those decisions and who does have the voice of authority on these future proceedings? And will regular reports be issued to contributors on the status of the lawsuit fund? Regrettably an initative of members' action became but another impliment of leadership controlled inaction, and as such there will of course be questions, disavowed by those in charge as complaining and disruptive. And so it goes...

[byamcaravanner]

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Why Internet arguments are so awful

Getting screwed over is the same... Internet or not. People are just reacting to getting an old fashioned screw job.

[xrvr]

I thought it was implied by LI Pets? that at the winter meetings it would become clearer if the new lawsuit would have to be filed? Did I misread or misinterpret statements made? zz

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by zigzagguzzi

I thought it was implied by LI Pets? that at the winter meetings it would become clearer if the new lawsuit would have to be filed? Did I misread or misinterpret statements made? zz

Absolutely not, that is correct.



/

[wheel interested]

The internet also allows a look at the style of comedy and characterizations.

Right you are gentlemen, that's another nice kettle of fish you pickled me in!

And Bob thanks for giving me the bird, but it was removed. I love your macaw Morgan and multimedia don't you?

YouTube - Stan and Ollie

[Nuvite-F]

Before this thread is closed I thought it might be useful to post a brief summary. All posts are by LI Pets except for one by the Metro NY Unit president announcing the decision to drop the lawsuit. Posts have been edited for brevity but not materially changed.

In the interest of not having this post deleted by the moderators I decided to refrain from adding my own comments. Actually, no comment is necessary; the reversals and self-contradictions of the quoted posts speak for themselves.

March 3, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

We have run this by our legal team long before we decided to move forward, there is substantial case law which I will not disclose in a forum where the WBCCI could see it.

March 5, 2010
(In response to a comment on the likelihood of the matter being referred to arbitration)

Originally Posted by LI Pets

That level playing field can only be found in Federal Court!

Folks there's no provision in the Constitution or Bylaws to have arbitration.

Federal Courts in civil matters do not do this -- they have a trial.

Most arbitration is considered binding: parties who agree to arbitration are bound to that agreement.

Do you think even if you could get the IBT to agree they would expose themselves to the likely result thereby, setting precedent for future claims against the club to be handled this way?

They will not agree, their lawyers will advise them not to agree.

Moreover, they allow no option for appeal, expecting parties who arbitrate to assume the risks of the process. Therefore foreclosing an opportunity to Court action if the outcome is not believed to be fair and just.

If you folks want to SAVE this 55 year old club lets get this dispute in front of a Federal Judge in New York.

March 5, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

We have done our due diligence in ferreting out the costs with a very qualified law firm.

March 5, 2010
(In response to skepticism that a lawyer had actually been consulted)

Originally Posted by LI Pets

I can assure all, that several law firms were interviewed, the one which Leo and I had 2 meetings with so far is our choice.

Provided of course we get enough pledges.

March 18, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

I wish it was that simple, the inner circle is so tightly knit they are only going to abide by a Judges Order, not us mere members.

Remember Leo spoke up, exposed the mis management, they developed a conspiracy to expel him.

The inner circle of good 'ol boys decided to kick him out. and said "(Collier)" if he wins his appeal we all ready have a 4th grievance ready to file"

So your spokesperson as soon as he or she speaks will be expelled...............

At this point the better option is let a Court decide the issues presented by the MERE members.

The case law in similar clubs is favoring that this can and will be done your support

March 18, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Correct, but I have been involved in many Federal lawsuits in order to protect my intellectual property, so although not an attorney, I have gone over case law with the attorney Leo intends to retain so it's not just my read.

No comment, until after discovery.

The complaint will be published, it's a matter of public record anyway.

March 30, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

The suit will be brought the Eastern District Federal Court, Islip NY.
The law basis is interesting and I don't know if they follow Federal, New York, Ohio (the incorporated state) or Nevada.

It maybe that Federal may be applicable due to the members being nationwide.

There's certainly enough yacht, golf club case law on the subject.

The plaintiffs will get that answer from their legal team shortly.

May 1, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

A Unit meeting was held a short while ago, two votes were taken.

1. Metro New York will be the principle plaintiff in the lawsuit.

2. Metro NY voted to contribute $2,000 from its treasury to commence the lawsuit ASAP.

This amount plus the current pledges allows us to begin the suit.

May 4, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

I'll take odds that Leo is reinstated in the lawsuit due to the gross violations of the IBT ignoring their own bylaws. Also when witness can testifiy that Collier said at the Fla State rally " if he (Leo) wins his appeal we have a new grievance waiting to file" how do spell conspiracy?

The discovery phase of the lawsuit will be very telling.

There's plenty of parking for Airstreams in Court's parking lot, even a motorhome.

Welcome to NY boys

May 4, 2010
(On the thread promoting “Reinstate Leo” ribbons)

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Hey folks don't mean to rain on your parade.

Consider the following.

I'm 99.999% certain the lawsuit will reinstate Leo.
The blatant disregard of the bylaws mandate it.

Now that the Lawsuit is in fact moving forward perhaps something along the lines of support DefendWally save the WBCCI may be more appropriate.

May 5, 2010

Our goal is the latter part of May, therefore, this International will have much to talk about.

May 5, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

The entire issue of how the WBBCI forum is run will be addressed in the suit.

May 6, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

You need to cite stuff than is less than 10 years old, also see cda 230

I've litigated this area of law in Federal court this year, you're incorrect as to the way the 2nd circuit will act.

And this case will be in that circuit.

May 7, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

IMO the IBT must be buzzing like crazy knowing that the lawsuit is not a threat, they must be in the holy s#$% mode.

They also have Leo's appeal coming up the beginning of June.
My guess is they don't want him at the rally so a decision will be sent afterwards.

With the Complaint hopefully being filed/served long before the International the end of June.
I can't imagine the attendees will be talking about anything other than this litigation.

May 23, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

This lawsuit is the best avenue to change the club.

The lawsuit has to be the main topic of discussion at Gillette, they certainly can't have an open mic.

I imagine about 1500 folks at Gillette all asking the IBT members all day & night hey "what about this lawsuit"

July 7, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

The defendants and their attorneys (are paid to read these posts) are following this forum which is why your questions can not be addressed publicly.

We are not avoiding the questions; suffice to say soon.

More issues to consider after the International meetings

July 21, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

I can only say that the lawsuit is progressing and not stalled or on anyone's back burner.

I'm in regular contact with the legal team, once yesterday, twice today.

Please be patient, it must be done correctly not quickly, there is a ton of case law that has been reviewed, this is a Federal Court, not judge Judy......big difference.

August 6, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Stay tuned

August 19, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Very soon, expect an announcement in the next day or two

August 23, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

A little birdie tells me an announcement as to the status will be posted later today.

August 24, 2010

Originally Posted by nasons

During the course of preparing the law suit, Defend Wally/Metro NY was contacted by WBCCI. Discussions began, and eventually centered on withholding the lawsuit in exchange for appointing a representative from Defend Wally/Metro NY to sit on a newly created “By-Laws Revision Committee.” This five member Committee would be tasked with consolidating and incorporating changes to the club’s Bylaws and Constitution. Encouraged by this turn of events and intent upon having a seat at the table to institute positive change within WBCCI, Defend Wally/Metro NY has decided to withhold filing suit in the hope that changes in the club can be achieved amicably through this new Committee.

Michele M. Curley
President Metro NY Unit
and on behalf of Defend Wally

August 24, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

The committee was created/approved July 5th I believe.
I was nominated to the committee and appointed by Norm B, The members other than myself to date are Donna G Parliamentarian, Joe P. Reg 10, Kerry M Reg 2. The 5th seat was discussed by us 4 and put to the IP for appointment that should be complete in a day or two. We have been emailing and speaking on the phone with each other. We will be using Go To Meeting to communicate between ourselves, besides email etc.

There is a lot of work to accomplish between now the Mid-winters.

I have permission to start a new thread to discuss any issues the members wish put forth for the committees review. “mistral blue” please repost your points there. This thread is about the lawsuit not the bylaws.

August 24, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

The DW funds will remain in escrow. In the end each pledge will be returned pro rata against expenses.

August 26, 2010
(following quotations from the thread, “WBCCI Bylaws/Constitution Suggestions. . .”)

Originally Posted by LI Pets

Leo as an an expelled member you have no place here nor will I address you or your sock puppets.

September 3, 2010

Originally Posted by LI Pets

I realize this will not make many happy campers, retroactive reinstatement will not happen, it’s not in the bylaws or RONR anyplace.

[garry]

Nuvite-F

Thanks for the post.

This is a very telling tale and brings the thought "Deeds speak louder than words"

or maybe "With friends like this you sure don't need any enemies".

[Gene]

Nuvi, great job.

What popped out at me was:

So it seems discussions were going on in early July and maybe June. A committee was agreed upon in early July. So none of that was a secret because the potential defendants knew all of that. So why was it kept secret? To keep talking lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit, was not being transparent, a complaint often made of the IBT.

And in a post that lasted a very short time, Bob claimed he had not been involved in litigation since the early 00's, but in this string of posts, Bob says he has been. On 3/18 he mentions lawsuits involving intellectual property. They or some were in the early 00's. On 5/6 he says he has been in federal court "this year".

I can see why Bob would want this thread shut down. Isn't that similar to what I have read about the WBCCI forum? So many people like silence.

Gene

[Nuvite-F]

Originally Posted by CrawfordGene

What popped out at me was:

So it seems discussions were going on in early July and maybe June. A committee was agreed upon in early July. So none of that was a secret because the potential defendants knew all of that. So why was it kept secret? To keep talking lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit, was not being transparent, a complaint often made of the IBT.

Popped out at me, too. As the old saying goes, "What did he know, and when did he know it?"

[silverleeper]

Originally Posted by Nuvite-F

Before this thread is closed

No need to worry about the thread closing.

I know this is a highly charged thread but if you wish to speak your mind keep it civil.

This thread will remain open as long as the players can keep there heads.

[Foiled Again]

If the lawsuit has been dropped or "put on the back burner" or negotiated away for a bowl of stew or simply isn't going forward at this time....

An escrow account should be used only to start writing refund checks within a matter of DAYS. Those who contributed should not ever be put in the position that the WBCCI has put us.... money going down an endless one-way sewer.

Keeping escrow funds beyond the admission that the day that the suit fell through is very IBT like.

If there are legitimate expenses, then the final bills will have already come in. Pay them, send a detailed, itemized list of them to each contributor along with the unused portion of their contribution.

I could have paid WBCCI dues for how many years before I'd dumped more money into their maw than I did to this? Who has violated my trust worse? The IBT or "defend wally"?

Paula

[Dave Park]

Metro NY is a chartered group of WBCCI. If you are planning to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit against WBCCI, giving a WBCCI-chartered unit access to your arguments, documents, contacts and donors in exchange for a $2,000 donation is a self-defeating move. It allows a WBCCI-subsidiary access you would not give to WBCCI itself.

Whose idea was it to allow Metro NY to become involved? Metro NY's?

Anyone else having a "no d'uh!" moment?

[Lily&Me]

Sad, sad, sad.

Some actions in this are no less than disgraceful and an embarrassment to the human race. Where is one's sense of personal integrity, moral compass, character, etc.? You know who you are.

I'm disgusted.

Maggie

[lewster]

Originally Posted by doug&maggie

Sad, sad, sad.

Some actions in this are no less than disgraceful and an embarrassment to the human race. Where is one's sense of personal integrity, moral compass, character, etc.? You know who you are.

I'm disgusted.

Maggie

I'm with you 100% Maggie!

Believe me, it's not the amount of the donation that I made that bothers me (which I will probably never see returned), it's the deceit and back room dealings that cut the deepest.

NEVER AGAIN!

[Nuvite-F]

Poor Michelle. I'm sure she never expected all this grief when she signed on to be a unit officer. She has my deepest sympathy.

Seems to me that this would make a pretty good basis for a grievance.

For that matter I wonder if there is a basis for actual criminal charges--wire fraud? Maybe one of the real lawyers who has been following this fiasco would care to comment.

Doubt it would be of any interest to a prosecutor, though. But we can always hope.

[Dave Park]

Whoever is holding the funds certainly has no basis in law to retain them, once the bills are settled.

The filing of a half dozen claims in small claims court would get things moving along very quickly, at minimal cost, and would reflect badly on the party holding the money - knowing this, 14 days notice of the impending lawsuit may do a lot to free up access to your respective monies.

Furthermore, you can sue for the amount given, before expenses. You can do this in the county court in YOUR jurisdiction, forcing the funds holder to defend lawsuits in numerous jurisdictions - something they cannot economically do.

[Lily&Me]

Let's be careful about encouraging lawsuits, folks, as that's how this all got going in the first place. This is a very expensive step to take, and even more expensive to keep going!!

That said, a sanction of some sort is clearly in order, perhaps best to be taken by the doers own unit.

Maggie