It was the wrong thread

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Fugee

You need to keep track of all the people you need to thank if you ever finish this book.

short stories, and the public availability of the work is thanks enough

[Penske 2.0]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

most religions disfavor murder, but Sunday is Chrisitian only. Why can't my Jewish wife buy booze on Xmas morning or any Sunday, while you can buy booze on Yom kippur and Friday night?

I usually serve champagne (this year it was Krug) on Christmas morning*, if your wife wants to note that to her calendar.

* some years the Christmas eve party blends into Christmas morning, and usually has about dozen jewish folk in attendance. I'm religiously diverse like that.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

HELP

I need a non-IP legal issue that could result in a claim for millions and which could be barred by laches.

specific performance of a real estate purchase agreement.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

specific performance of a real estate purchase agreement.

details please.

[Hank Chinaski]

like here is my standard- P knew of D's product for years and never threatened patent infringement. then does sue after 8 years.

if it is proven P knew then laches kicks in. I need something where someone forges a date so it's not 8 years, it's three.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

like here is my standard- P knew of D's product for years and never threatened patent infringement. then does sue after 8 years.

if it is proven P knew then laches kicks in. I need something where someone forges a date so it's not 8 years, it's three.

Dad dies, leaving his oh-so-successful widget manufacturing business in the hands of his brother as an informal trustee for his 19 (or 22, depending upon state, I guess -- legally an adult, but obviously of an immature and unsophisticated age) son until son turns 25. Son signs off on the deal at the funeral, relieved that he can continue his feckless ways of skateboarding and huffing cans of whipped cream. Brother/uncle promises in the deal to provide reports and accountings along with 75% of the monthly profits.

The checks flow and the son continues his Jackass 3-D lifestyle until, at age 28, he meets a waitress with good hair. He realizes that there is more to life than exploding M-80s in his butt cheeks, and decides that he needs to work in the family business. He shows up at the factory and only then learns that uncle sold the whole shebang to Acme, Inc. x years prior for an ungodly sum of money. The deal had been widely reported in every media outlet imaginable.

[Gattigap]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Dad dies, leaving his oh-so-successful widget manufacturing business in the hands of his brother as an informal trustee for his 19 (or 22, depending upon state, I guess -- legally an adult, but obviously of an immature and unsophisticated age) son until son turns 25. Son signs off on the deal at the funeral, relieved that he can continue his feckless ways of skateboarding and huffing cans of whipped cream. Brother/uncle promises in the deal to provide reports and accountings along with 75% of the monthly profits.

The checks flow and the son continues his Jackass 3-D lifestyle until, at age 28, he meets a waitress with good hair. He realizes that there is more to life than exploding M-80s in his butt cheeks, and decides that he needs to work in the family business. He shows up at the factory and only then learns that uncle sold the whole shebang to Acme, Inc. x years prior for an ungodly sum of money. The deal had been widely reported in every media outlet imaginable.

I would buy that book.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

I would buy that book.

But how's an equitable defense work with those facts? Is it dependent on his failure to notice for 3 years that he hadn't had the business dumped on his head? It's more a SOL issue--fraud, deemed discovered, and the limit running before suit. Laches would prevent the equitable remedy, but so would the clean hands of Acme, Inc.

Unless you add in a bad/corrupt judge. And, yes, I'd still buy the book, too.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

But how's an equitable defense work with those facts? Is it dependent on his failure to notice for 3 years that he hadn't had the business dumped on his head? It's more a SOL issue--fraud, deemed discovered, and the limit running before suit. Laches would prevent the equitable remedy, but so would the clean hands of Acme, Inc.

Unless you add in a bad/corrupt judge. And, yes, I'd still buy the book, too.

p needs to be a business, but bob, you're getting close. thanks

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

I would buy that book.

Good, cause I'm writing something insanely close to it. Only with tax. Cause we so hot.

Tax lawyers, I mean.

But hey, you probably already knew that.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

I would buy that book.

Hank and I thank you. We are the ebony and i-VO-ry of the FB Publishing Collective. Or the Felix and Oscar. Whichever.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

p needs to be a business, but bob, you're getting close. thanks

De nada, tovarisch. Two words to remember -- "screen rights."

Danke.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

But how's an equitable defense work with those facts? Is it dependent on his failure to notice for 3 years that he hadn't had the business dumped on his head? It's more a SOL issue--fraud, deemed discovered, and the limit running before suit. Laches would prevent the equitable remedy, but so would the clean hands of Acme, Inc.

Unless you add in a bad/corrupt judge. And, yes, I'd still buy the book, too.

I have never won a case on a laches defense, but IIRC it goes to whether the P has changed the equities by delay. Hypos with disgorgement remedies are harder to establish this, so the specific performance hypo is better for this. Or maybe a constructive discharge lawsuit where the employee can get reinstatement as a remedy under the statute. So my hypo would be employee is fired from CEO position but waits six months to sue for reinstatement -- meanwhile new CEO has been hired after a national search. Can get front pay, but reinstatement is barred by laches. (Has to be CEO to make damages millions per Hank's parameters.)

[Atticus Grinch]

There must be more to the story that I'm not getting, but this seems like a huge overreaction by the Court.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

There must be more to the story that I'm not getting, but this seems like a huge overreaction by the Court.

i'm going to email good opposing counsel meaningless confidential shit "on accident" from now on.