Come clean? I don't recall the issue of who I am ever coming up,
Skip.
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Skip Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I'm glad you enjoyed that; now why don't you come clean and sign
your
> contributions? I assume from Dan's letters that you are in fact
Tom
> DeSeno.
>
> --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "bluebishop82"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Now that's funny Skip! See, we can rib each other a little bit
> > without actully being insulting.
> >
> >
> > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Skip Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > `As for you calling me an "ambulance chaser,"'
> > > I have it on good authority that Tommy, BB82 or whoever in
hell
> > this
> > > is, limits himself to chasing monster trucks; and you can take
> > that to
> > > the bank.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "bluebishop82"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Nice backtrack. Now you're just projecting your lack of
> > > > understanding on to me. My original post made no mention of
the
> > > > bankruptcy clause. It was your original post that tried to
make
> > it
> > > > seem the redevelopment rights would stay clear of the
bankruptcy
> > > > court (that was the point of your post), which you clearly
> > concede
> > > > now that it won't.
> > > >
> > > > As for your assertion that the lawyers you work with
> > > > aren't "practicing in AP" (as if that is beneath them),
well,
> > that's
> > > > just you pointing out again your disdain for people from
Asbury
> > Park
> > > > and this area in general, which is how we met in the first
> > place,
> > > > isn't it?
> > > >
> > > > As for you calling me an "ambulance chaser," when my
adversary
> > has
> > > > nothing left to retort with but name calling, that's when I
know
> > > > I've won the arguement.
> > > >
> > > > By the way, if you read that old triCity article, you will
find
> > I
> > > > never called into question your abilities in your field. I
> > wouldn't
> > > > do that. I made the point that I thought you would have a
> > conflict
> > > > on one matter: valuing the triangle property, due to your
> > comments
> > > > about (and obvious feeling toward) the parties. Having a
> > conflict
> > > > on a case is not a knock against your abilities. I've been
> > > > conflicted out of a number of cases for a variety of reasons.
> > > >
> > > > Oh, before I forget. There was a mistake of law in your
> > question to
> > > > Jim Aaron - Bankruptcy Court is a court of equity, not law.
> > > >
> > > > Look, you aren't outmatched in this conversation because law
is
> > my
> > > > field. You're just outmatched by a guy from AP.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "dfsavgny"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "bluebishop82"
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > I never said it was "no good." I've read your bragging
> > about
> > > > the
> > > > > > lawyers you deal with being the best there is. Go ask
one
> > of
> > > > them
> > > > > > what proceedings you could expect from creditors if this
> > > > provision
> > > > > > is triggered.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom, there is always litigation, that's why there are
lawyers.
> > > > You're
> > > > > good at sound bites but short on proof as always. I hope
you
> > go
> > > > into
> > > > > court with more than that. Say what you will but your
original
> > > > post
> > > > > made it seem as if the clause was not worth the paper it
was
> > > > written
> > > > > on. I am sure you are aware that any creditors would see
the
> > > > agreement
> > > > > and see that the city has a reverter clause. Also,
creditors
> > have
> > > > the
> > > > > right to remedy any defaults but all have to be approved
by
> > the
> > > > city.
> > > > > I will defer to you on bankruptcy law. Be sure that the
> > attorneys
> > > > I
> > > > > work with do not chase ambulances or practice in AP or
Toms
> > River.
> > > > In
> > > > > the end you are right that there will be litigation, but
> > > > litigation is
> > > > > not necessrily bad. Sometimes it is the only choice when
one
> > party
> > > > to
> > > > > a contract will not perform. Your rationale says that one
> > should
> > > > not
> > > > > ask that party to perform as agreed to in the contract
lest
> > they
> > > > > litigate. That is my very early point about having a gun
when
> > they
> > > > > other guy knows you'll never pull the trigger. Do you know
> > where
> > > > that
> > > > > gun will land up? You'll need a proctologist to remove it.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
