Former radio talk show host, Nathaniel Livingston Jr. has filed suit last week in U.S. District court. He as accused Mayor Charlie Luken, Cinti City Council and the police of improperly seizing and destroying hundreds of abandoned cars during last year's Operation Clean Sweep.

Included in the lawsuit is the claim that little nate's Constitutional Rights were violated when they "Abducted and Murdered" his 1987 Missan Maxima.

little nate claims that his car was NOT abandoned but was legally parked (on the street) in front of his home. He said that losing the car was like losing a "pet or dear friend."

Of course he neglected to say that the vehicle didn't have an engine.

little nate is claiming $1,000,000 in damages.

I ain't making this shit up, kiddies!!

------------------
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

You check Gae's unbelieveable thread

------------------
Can't sleep, Clowns will eat me

I take a couple uppers, I down a couple downers
But nothing compares to these blue and yellow purple pills
I've been to mushroom mountain, once or twice but who's countin
But nothin compares to these blue and yellow purple pills

did anyone hear about the woman suing ticketmaster for a million because they sold her seats that sucked for a michael jackson concert?

------------------
http://assassincomic.cjb.net

Anyway...did we ever find Bill Cosby's email...it would be a kick to show him an upstanding member of the Black United Front. Maybe include his court records? LOL

------------------
"Our firmest convictions are apt to be the most suspect, they mark our limitations and our bounds. Life is a petty thing unless it is moved by the indomitable urge to extend its boundaries." — Jose Ortega y Gasset

------------------
Sluggo

But according to Willie Cunningham, little nate's 30 plus page document was filed by HIM (little nate) because no lawyer in his right mind would touch it!!

I'm about ready to leave so I can't look it up, but I recall some of his cases being continued because he has no money for lawyer. DUH

Even Ken Lawson has seen the light....or at least hasn't see a paycheck.

------------------
"Our firmest convictions are apt to be the most suspect, they mark our limitations and our bounds. Life is a petty thing unless it is moved by the indomitable urge to extend its boundaries." — Jose Ortega y Gasset

What's this "frivilous" rule you mentioned? I haven't heard of that one.

------------------
The two legacies of my good Jesuit education:

1) A Jesuit priest is a very intelligent man.

Let me get this straight- you're telling me that a lawyer can be punished for bringing a "frivilous" lawsuit? Where- England? Remiel, is that true?

------------------
The two legacies of my good Jesuit education:

1) A Jesuit priest is a very intelligent man.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lew:
GL-

Let me get this straight- you're telling me that a lawyer can be punished for bringing a "frivilous" lawsuit? Where- England? Remiel, is that true?

---

Have you been having fun at my expense over a misspelling Lew? Just sharing what my father's attorney told me when he handled the case for me. In fact another attorney told me that too when I had a personal injury case before that one...

------------------
Sluggo

Nah, I’m not knocking your spelling (if I did, that would be the pot calling the kettle black!) I was just confused over this whole “frivolous” issue. I believe your attorney was making reference to the mythical Rule 11. Well, I don’t know what “frivolous” is.

But I can tell you what it is not-

Several years ago, I was trying to settle a personal injury case in another state. The plaintiff attorney had been saying the case was worth a gold mine, they were going to clean our clocks, blah blah. We only offered a nominal settlement, he didn’t want any part of it. Then one day out of the blue, he calls us and says they’d accept our offer if we could issue the check immediately.

We got suspicious. I mean, all along your case is worth the moon, then one day you just accept our offer? Didn’t sound right. So, we told him we’d see if we could get a check, but it could take a few days. That bought us some time to do some research, and damned if we didn’t come to find out that the plaintiff had died (from causes not related to our case). We continued playing with the attorney for awhile, just to see if he was going to come clean with us. He never did (kept pushing for us to settle, actually) and finally, a few weeks later, we spilled the beans about his client. His response? “What? I didn’t know that.”

I was licking at the chops. I remember thinking “boy, we’re gonna have this guy disbarred for life.” We filed our complaint with the state bar association, and-

Nothing. No problemo. Complaint dismissed. Innocent mistake.

I was never so disgusted in my life. Fortunately, in time, I got used to this kind of thing, and now they no longer bother me. If it happened now, I probably wouldn’t even bother the bar association or the judge.

But every time I hear someone mention Rule 11 (the “frivolous” rule) I have to laugh.

Moral to the story- I see absolutely nothing frivolous with Nate’s lawsuit. And if they were to dismiss it for being frivolous, it won’t be because of that, it will be because it’s Nate and they’re tired of his crap. John Doe could bring a suit like this no problem.

------------------
The two legacies of my good Jesuit education:

1) A Jesuit priest is a very intelligent man.