Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
She Wouldn't Listen to Me
Defending a lawsuit, even a frivolous one, is costly in terms of time, energy, and finances. There is no absolute guarantee that a defendant will recover costs. ================= While true in many cases-it is completely false in SLAPP cases. The statute itself REQUIRES the vexatious litigant to cover all costs of the defendant. And let me tell you-if the plaintiff's have enough money to file a lawsuit they have enough to cover sanctions of an anti-SLAPP motion. In addition the court could also slap (no pun intended) a vexatious litigant order against the plaintiff for filing the lawsuit-which would prevent the vexatious litigant from filing ANY future lawsuits without prior approval from the judge. The courts are not a place to play games, and if a judge thinks for even a second a lawsuit is without merit and only intended for harrassment pruposes-bring your toothbrush to court, b/c you're going to need it. Just some helpful info.— May 10, 2010 12:17 p.m.
She Wouldn't Listen to Me
Whether a lawsuit has merit or not, it still can be filed and cause difficulties for a defendant despite what someone states in this blog. ================ Very true, you can file lawsuits all day long, and may **temporarily** cause difficulties, BUT when a judge tosses out a bogus lawsuit under the anti-SLAPP provisions of state law, and then makes the one who filed the bogus lawsuit pay for all the costs to defend against it- then that person will learn a very good lesson (and have much BIGGER difficulties). BTW, an anti-SLAPP motion is the very first response filed in a lawsuit that involves issues like we have here (public-limited public figures/public statements/defamation/false light), it stops everything dead in it's tracks, including all discovery. So if that motion is successful, and there are literally hundreds of published cases on them in CA, then the case is over and very little time, money or energy is spent by the defendant-all reimbursed by the Plaintiff. I don't think anyone was implying you were the attorney who was mentioned.......— May 8, 2010 10:01 p.m.
She Wouldn't Listen to Me
Roadhouse is on TV right now-Im watching it.......I like Dalton's pad above the barn........— May 8, 2010 9:51 p.m.
Cold!
Yikes!— May 8, 2010 6:26 p.m.
She Wouldn't Listen to Me
I would advise the Reader staff to check their insurance coverage as something of a legal nature might come their way IF anything is not true in the DUI checkpoint account as it relates to the attorney. Lawsuits, whether you prevail or not, must be defended. ============= The attorney in this is a public figure due to the publicity he has from hsi own lawsuits. Even if that were not true, he is a semi public figure in this story because he was in a public place making public statements. The attorney would have to make the nearly impossible task of proving intentional malice to prevail in a lawsuit. As for defending a lawsuit-please review California's Code of Civil Procedure § 425.17 and see what happens when someone files a bogus lawsuit claiming damages out of public statements.— May 8, 2010 6:23 p.m.
Dow Plunges 348 -- but Recovers from Near 1,000 Drop
You're using jargon that I don't understand. Best, Don Bauder ================= Casinos use what is known as a "shoe" to deal their blackjack cards out of. A "shoe" is a box that holds 5-6 decks of cards-which lowers the odds for "card counters", gamblers that make bets based on the cards that have been played so far-each card played is given a numerical value, and with a deck of 52 cards you can determine what cards are left by counting the ones played so far. Counting cards turns the advantage to the gambler. So the casinos use the shoe to beat card counters, by using 300+ cards in a shoe, instead of using just 52. A "cooler" is a shoe the gambler brings INTO the casino (secretly), with the decks prearranged in the shoe, and when the dealer is not looking (due to an intentional distraction) the gambler switches out the dealers shoe with the gamblers OWN shoe-the "cooler". The gambler then knows what cards are coming-because he put them there-and bets accordingly. It is a very dangerous and extremely risky cheating scheme-which has been pulled off though by sophisticated scammers.— May 8, 2010 6:15 p.m.
Dumanis Gives the Green Light to Corruption
Just one more note - almost all Police Officers have at least a bachelors degree, with a very large number of masters degrees and Phd's. By DaveMagown =================== And the whoppers just keep on coming! 80%+ of ALL cops, especially in large metro PD's, have just a GED or HS diploma at hire. The notion that "almost all Police Officers have at least a bachelors degree, with a very large number of masters degrees and Phd's" is the joke of the century. Do you seriously think the public would believe something so ridiculous????— May 8, 2010 6:03 p.m.
Dumanis Gives the Green Light to Corruption
Are there reasons they get to collect earlier? Yes - many. Police Officers, Firemen, and many other City Workers do hard physical labor. Their ability to do that job does not last as long as most positions in the private sector, and is the same reason that 20 years is a career in the military. ================ Wow Dave, you laidout so many gov whoppers that I can't respond to all of them, so I will respond to this one since it is right up there with the whopper that police and firewhiners die at age 57 (so they deserve $5 million pensions). BTW, for the record, the mortality rate for cop/ff is 81-86. #1) do you have any studies are other evidence to support your wild claim that cop and FF "do hard physical labor" (unless you're claiming that cooking, BBQing, shopping, sleeping and report writing is "hard physical labor"). The fact is both jobs entail almost NO physical labor. The vast majority of a cops time is sitting in a car responding to various calls and even more time is spent sitting in the car and writing reports. 50% of a cops time, or more, is spent writing reports-that is not what most people refer to as "physical labor". FF is even less physical than that. The construction trades are 100 tiems more physical and 100 times more dangerous. They don't get to "retire" at age 50 making more than when they worked. #2) a large part of the pensions were given (as in gifted) retroactively, so the notion that you earned that pension is false. YOUR union betrayed you by going along with an underfunding scheme in exchange for a huge increase in benefits-the way I see it is that the union is more at fault than the fraudstirs that offered that deal-because the unions had a DUTY to make sure the fund was solvent. They breached that duty by allowing the underfunding of the fund.— May 8, 2010 6 p.m.
She Wouldn't Listen to Me
"He said,'Today is the worst day of your life. I'm in the fax mafia and I'm in the fax suing business,'" =================== OMG is that hilariuous! The "fax mafia"!!!! I wish I could come up with some sort of classic throw down, one liners like that! Something like; "Today is the worst day of your life. I'm in the puppy mafia, and we enforce "pick up after your pet" laws!" I love it.— May 7, 2010 2:51 p.m.
Dumanis Gives the Green Light to Corruption
So as the Roadrunner says to Wile E. Coyote as he leaves him in the dust once again.... MmmEEPP-MmmEEPPP Now Don ....quick chuckling .... I know you like that one! ================ Well, at least the MmmEEPP-MmmEEPPP part was funny! And RR was [is] one of my favorite cartoons as a kid.— May 7, 2010 1:36 p.m.