| Author: |
| ||||
| Subject: |
| ||||
| Message: | VMC Attorney proved to be a joke No secret VMC/Robert Neal, Jr. has is "attorney" issue cease and desist letters in an attempt to intimiate and/or silence unflattering posts. Here's a reply to one such attempt: RE: Victory Motor Cars, Inc., Robert Lee Neal, Jr. Dear Attorney Rosenberg: CEASE AND DESIST This office represents Mr. S regarding your ridiculous "Cease and Desist" letter of October 13, 2008, to which I respond to as follows: First and foremost, your client’s business reputation lacks integrity as evidenced by his and/or his representative’s apparent forgery of a state of Texas Certificate of Title for a Motor Vehicle, namely a 1997 Porsche sold by Mr. Neal, to Mr. S, as confirmed by the previous owner. Second, a first year law student knows the elements of defamation. Since you apparently were asleep that day, I suggest you do some research before raising such issues. Third, unless you have a propensity to leap to erroneous conclusions, your client seems to be misinforming you of the facts. Mr. S attempted to reach an agreeable resolution regarding Mr. Neal’s blatant misrepresentations and unethical and/or illegal business practices. During that attempt, Mr. S was kind enough to advise your client of his findings with regard to the forged and/or misrepresented signature on the Texas title. Additionally, any first year law student knows Mr. S has no power to institute a criminal prosecution. He does however, have every legal right to report a crime by your client and/or his representatives, and he will. Fourth, I am unable to confirm you are properly licensed to practice law in either Mr. S’s state of California, or Mr. Neal’s state of business incorporation, in Texas. In regards to practicing law without a license, Section 81.101 of the Texas Government Code states: (a) In this chapter the "practice of law" means the preparation of a pleading or other document incident to an action or special proceeding or the management of the action or proceeding on behalf of a client before a judge in court as well as a service rendered out of court, including the giving of advice or the rendering of any service requiring the use of legal skill or knowledge, such as preparing a will, contract, or other instrument, the legal effect of which under the facts and conclusions involved must be carefully determined. (emphasis added). Out-of-state lawyers without California licenses are engaging in the unauthorized practice of law if they participate in "sufficient activities in the state". Lawyers need not even be physically present in California to violate unauthorized-practice-of-law restrictions. Birbrower, Montalbano, Condon & Frank, P.C., et al. v. The Superior Court of Santa Clara County (17 Cal.4th 119, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 304, 949 P.2d 1 (Feb. 25, 1998)). Last but not least, regarding your diatribe regarding the internet and "unflattering and injurious remarks" which would adversely affect your client in the course of their business, I suggest but for your client’s unflattering and injurious activities, there would have been no damages to my client, and no need to read your drivel. Noting your lack of legal knowledge and/or sophistication, regarding the internet’s First Amendment’s right to free speech, the courts have repeatedly held that speech which is merely a statement of defendant's personal opinion about the quality of services provided by a plaintiff company, is PROTECTED. If you were familiar with your own state’s ruling you would know the words of Justice Gische, who wrote in Penn Warranty Corp. v. DiGiovanni, No. 600659/04 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York County Oct. 28, 2005): "Perhaps most compelling is the fact that the web site, when viewed in its full context, reveals that defendant is a disgruntled consumer and that his statements reflect his personal opinion based upon his personal dealings with plaintiff. They are subjective expressions of consumer dissatisfaction [and] are not actionable because they are defendant's personal opinion." AS SUCH, your Cease and Desist letter is meritless and will be ignored. Should you contact either Mr.Satuloff, or this office again, regarding this matter, I will take all legal steps available to me. No further notice will be given to you, Mr. Neal, or Victory Motor Cars, Inc. You are hereby advised to CEASE AND DESIST. Your prompt and personal attention to this matter will be anticipated. I trust that there will be no further need for this office to contact you again. Sincerely,DLD, Esq. Admitted to practice before the: Supreme Court of the State of California United States District Court, Central District of California United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Supreme Court of the United States of America | ||||
© 1997 -
2009
Jump Internet Inc. All rights reserved.
