Thanks to E. Normis Debtor

I have noted with great interest that E. Normis Debtor has posted his suggestion that the defendant challenge the jurisdiction of the court on his blog. In the referenced case the Plaintiff has expressed great respect for E. Normis Debtor and his opinions.

How the Plaintiff will react to E. Normis Debtor having made suggestions which are apparently intended to reduce the chances of the Plaintiff to prevail remains to be seen.

The outcome of this case will be interesting indeed.

Another interesting aspect of this ongoing lawsuit is that Robert Paisola of Western Capitol Financial and mycollector dot com has expressed an interest in being joined as a 4th plaintiff in the case. He has generously offered to pay half the costs of litigation.

In the event that the current 3 platiffs should decide to accept Paisola's offer would they then be willing to give Paisola half of the expected $1,040,000 proceeds?
It seems unlikely that they would sell a half interest in the proceeds for $125.oo but if the plaintiffs were to accept Paisola's offer that certainly would seem to be a great position for Paisola to be in.

Maybe they would be more amenable if Robbie were to pay $90 for a 1/4 interest in the outcome of the suit and take the chance of walking out with $260,000 each.

If the court dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction as suggested by E. Normis Debtor then the current 3 plaintiffs would only have wasted $270. That may be something they might give some consideration due to their obvioiusly great respect for the opinions of E. Normis Debtor. If, on the other hand they let Paisola have a half interest in return for the payment of half the costs and the court dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction, they would only be out $180.00.

There is also the possibility that the court will dismiss on other grounds raised by the defendant and if that happens the defendant may decide he ought to file suit on some availably cause of action. Maybe the defendant might sue each of the current plaintiffs for $1,040,000 each. How would Paisola like that? The defendant has good reason to suspect that Paisola would not even respond to the complaint and the defendant would then be awarded judgment against Paisola for the full $1,040,000 plus costs. After all, he didn't respond to other complaints when he was sued so why would he respond to another one?

Of course, the current plaintiffs and Paisola alike believe that they will be victorious but at best they only have a 50-50 chance to win. Either they will or they won't. Only time will tell which way it will go.

P.S.

After a week of watching the Open, E. Normis Debtor finally woke up, rushed over here to see what the latest news might be regarding this case, hunted around Paisola's blogs until he found what I was referring to and finally from deep within the bowels of his nauseous anatomy loudly emitted the following"

Sunday, July 1, 2007
More babble eminating from the pie whole of Paisola
Recently, Western Capital CEO Robert Paisola suggested he be named a co-plaintiff in the case of Callier et al v. Creditwrench. His reasoning? He is a "similarly situated party".

Where Paisola comes up with so much Crappola is beyond me.

This case is not a class action, doesn't qualify as a class action, and will never be a class action.

What Robert Paisola is talking about, but apparently knows nothing about, is the legal principle of permissive joinder.

However, to be joined as a plaintiff in the instant case would require that Western Capital CEO Robert Paisola had a right to relief out of the same occurrance(s) alleged by the current plaintiffs that entitles them to relief. One only need read the complaint to see that Robert Paisola has no colorable claim arising from the actions of Creditwrench that allegedly damaged the named plaintiffs.

// posted by E. Normis Debtor @ 12:57 PM
Sunday, June 17, 2007
More false and misleading information from America's most notorious con-man Robert Paisola
More later....watching the Open :)

// posted by E. Normis Debtor @ 8:40 AM
Wednesday, June 13, 2007

He just couldn't resist the temptation be a spoil sport since it would have been funny as all git-out if Paisola had actually tried to become a co-plaintiff and the current plaintiffs had attempted to let him in.