I think I predicted it in one of my previous posts on this issue (here, here and here) or at least in the comments thread. The $64M pants man has appealed the decision rejecting his exorbitant claim regarding a pair of lost suit pants. Oh dear…so predictable. Vexatious litigant in the making, methinks. Me also thinks that he won’t get his contract renewed…
-
Recent Comments
- Michael Jackson and Resulting Trusts... 2
Legal Eagle, Adrien - Enforcing social rules: you can't plan that 18
John Hasenkam, pedro, skepticlawyer, Adrien, Jacques Chester, skepticlawyer [...] - Monopolies by 'creeping acquisition' to be legislated against 11
Jacques Chester, Dave Bath, Legal Eagle, Sinclair Davdson, Adrien, Legal Eagle [...] - Re-run of "Sudoku trial" finishes 6
Legal Eagle, fatfingers, Lad Litter, Legal Eagle, Flozza, Andrew - Everybody panic! 6
Jacques Chester, Adrien, Legal Eagle, DeusExMacintosh, skepticlawyer, Jacques Chester - My Enemy's Honour 2
Legal Eagle, skepticlawyer - Law firms feeling the pinch in US 2
skepticlawyer, Armagny - Not as easy as ABC 20
Legal Eagle, pedro, skepticlawyer, Adrien, pedro, Adrien [...] - Congratulations! 17
Nanu, Legal Eagle, John Greenfield, Adrien, Pavlov's Cat, Helen [...] - 52:48 11
Adrien, fairlane, skepticlawyer, AJ, Adrien, fairlane [...] - Some excellent procrastination tools 2
Adrien, Podblack - Be careful with those possessive pronouns! 2
Legal Eagle, conrad - Dozing judge a miscarriage of justice 5
Peter Evans, Legal Eagle, Legal Eagle, marcellous, Dave Bath
- Michael Jackson and Resulting Trusts... 2
-
Categories
- Academia
- Animals
- Art
- Blogging
- Books
- Breastfeeding
- Children
- Cricket
- Defence
- Depression
- Drugs
- Economics
- Education
- England
- Entrepreneurs
- Environment
- Equity
- Events
- Fark!
- Feminism
- Free Speech
- Funnies
- General
- History
- Human/Civil rights
- Immigration
- Insolvency law
- Intellectual property
- Internet
- Law
- Literature
- Marriage
- Media
- Middle east
- Motherhood
- Music
- Personal
- Personal liberty
- Philosophy
- Politics
- Popular culture
- Pregnancy
- Privacy
- Public Policy
- Racism
- Religion
- Restitution
- Science
- Sex
- Site News
- Skeptics
- Society
- Sport
- Taxation
- Technology
- Terrorism
- The Left
-
Archives
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
6 Comments
The guy has to be mentally ill. Someone needs to request a Psychological Evaluation on the guy.
Yes Fairlane, that’s pretty much exactly what my wife said…and I can only agree.
He is clearly a person who should not be holding the office he currently is in.
Yeah, I was thinking about strait jackets…
When I read about this, i knew you’d have a post on it by the time i got home.
He is not a vexatious litigant for appealing. Vexatious litigants are those that file numerous claims all derivations on the one claim, or claims with no obvious merit on their face.
As far as I know this is his only Court action with this claim, and he is legally entitled to appeal.
He is still a @#$%wit though. And does nothing to improve the general impression the public has of the legal system.
It has been reported that the City Council has told him not to bother re-applying for his administrative position, when it falls due to expire later this year. I don’t think he really cares.
Hello PeteM
“He is not a vexatious litigant for appealing. Vexatious litigants are those that file numerous claims all derivations on the one claim, or claims with no obvious merit on their face.”
I’m no legal expert, but does he not qualify as a vexatious litigant under the “claim with no obvious merit…” clause ?