quote:

So my friend needs help but I don't know what to do or how to help. Basically the situation is that he tried to get custody of his kid from his ex-girlfriend. She won the lottery last year but she wouldn't help him out when he needed so he thought if he got custody she would have to pay him child support.
But instead he got denied custody and isn't allowed to see his kid at all or even pick up his kid from school when his kid starts school this fall. He also got told he has to pay her 2 yrs worth of back child support and child support going forward even though she's never asked for child support or for him to be involved ever. How can they do this if she never tried to get him involved? It's unjust that he will go bankrupt when she won the lottery and has lots of money. Can he appeal this or something? He's real worried and I want to help him out.

gamingCaffeinator posted:

This is the dumbest one I've seen.

Some dickbag decided that Starbucks underfills their lattes because 'the volume of the foam doesn't count', and he is now suing.

Aesop Poprock posted:

This could have long term ramifications in the future case of "these cereal boxes are only like 1/3 full"

Canuckistan posted:

That Awesome Time I Was Sued for Two Billion Dollars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSWqx8goqSY

From Defcon 17, the owner of textfiles.com talks about getting sued by a sovereign citizen for 2 billion dollars. Entertaining and informative!

gamingCaffeinator posted:

This is the dumbest one I've seen.

Some dickbag decided that Starbucks underfills their lattes because 'the volume of the foam doesn't count', and he is now suing.

Drone_Fragger posted:

It basically boils down to what starbucks is selling, fluid or volume of a fluid. He's not actually completely wrong about it.

What he is wrong about is thinking that somehow buying a coffee from starbucks is a good idea when their coffee is not only trash but they don't pay taxes

Alter Ego posted:

I don't know if it counts as a lawsuit because I'm not sure it ever went to court, but is Curtis Got Slapped By A White Teacher a valid response?

Because it should be.

The TLDR for those of you that have never heard of it: insane sovereign citizen mom's kid gets smacked in the face by a teacher, so she writes a crazy 40-page manifesto to the school, the state, and to the feds (specifically President Obama) full of demands, declarations, threats, and just reams of complete loving insanity.

Leavemywife posted:

Can someone explain what a sovereign citizen is? From how I get it, they seem to think they'll be immune to the law, not pay taxes and still live with all the benefits of being a regular citizen.

Leavemywife posted:

Can someone explain what a sovereign citizen is? From how I get it, they seem to think they'll be immune to the law, not pay taxes and still live with all the benefits of being a regular citizen.

Judge Schnoopy posted:

They distinguish between their federal entity (a name with a bunch of documentation attached to it) and their physical self (their person), and claim that by acting as their physical self they are immune to most procedures and laws as those laws are enforced on their entity. They are, however, entitled to federal benefits (such as legal protection, bill of rights, so forth) that are provided to their entity.

It's a bunch of *top secret* logic loops that they believe were installed as a back door by Illuminati or Freemasons or Lizard People to allow themselves freedom above the system. They think that by invoking this logic they too can be above the system, a sovereign citizen.

Sestze posted:

According to sovereign citizen logic, there also exists a $200,000 bond that every citizen has given at birth that can be invoked in the case of outstanding personal debt or litigation.

Judge Schnoopy posted:

Now is that personal debt to their entity or to their person? More than 1 layer deep the whole thing really starts falling apart.

Capitalization is also extremely important. Birth certificates contain all caps, so PHILLIP BE BANGIN identifies the legal entity that is part of the federal government, is given a social security number, and is the instrument against which all litigation is processed. Phillip B. Bangin identifies the physical person, but the person is not bound to that name, it's merely for the ease of communication and social representation.

Alter Ego posted:

Somebody who thinks that a flag with a gold fringe means that the building it's in operates under maritime law.

Leavemywife posted:

Can someone explain what a sovereign citizen is? From how I get it, they seem to think they'll be immune to the law, not pay taxes and still live with all the benefits of being a regular citizen.

NoEyedSquareGuy posted:

Beekeeping and You posted:

Any insane documents that the government is forced to look at is fine for the sake of this thread, because I don't want to limit the schadenfreude

FFT posted:

anyone tempted to bring up McDonald's Coffee Lady should learn better in the process of picking a link.

Postal Parcel posted:

All of you lieberals siding with the money grubbing geezer stealing from a poor ol' multinational corporation. This is why everyone else is beating us! Grow a pair and read through the lines. Hot coffee was just a distraction from hotter coffee(9/11) Learn the truth!

Anyway, after you've learned the truth, have a gander at ye olde "[Jonathon Lee Riches] sues everyone"
http://citypaper.net/articles/2006-04-13/NC_FP_Lawsuit.pdf

Gervasius posted:

He sued Warsaw Pact, NSDAP, Plato and Christopher Reeve's widow

e: Jesus Christ this keeps going.

tentative8e8op posted:

Oh my god, the list really keeps going for 57 pages

TheDon01 posted:

Yeah, gotta admit I was one of those folks years ago thinking "jeez thats dumb, of course coffee is hot. What a dummy" then a buddy I said that to was like "woah dude no, here look at the pictures."

They're horrific, that lady deserved every penny she got.

Aphrodite posted:

People just heard the part where McDonalds was required to put "Coffee Hot" on the cups or something, which is pretty dumb and doesn't help the issue of them serving coffee hot enough to fuse skin anyway.

Canuckistan posted:

That Awesome Time I Was Sued for Two Billion Dollars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSWqx8goqSY

From Defcon 17, the owner of textfiles.com talks about getting sued by a sovereign citizen for 2 billion dollars. Entertaining and informative!

Platystemon posted:

Lonnie G. Schmidt writes the date as “October 18, 2001 A.D.”

What a a dumbass. Anno Domini is a prefix, not a suffix.

im pooping! posted:

I'm a notary and you would be surprised the number of times I've seen the distinction that papers are signed this year AD. The papers are always a form letter from legalzoom and it probably came about when some bitch was left out of a will and challenged the validity of a document based on not being clear if the paper was forged because it is very unlikely the thing was signed 4000 years ago. Then again I'm a notary and not a lawyer.

Arcsquad12 posted:

https://www.gofundme.com/47uexn9c

TLDR Idiot game developers try to raise money to file a lawsuit against a fat English video game critic because he laughs at their terrible games so they think he's costing them millions of dollars in lost sales.

quote:

Arkell v. Pressdram (1971) [unreported]

Solicitor (Goodman Derrick & Co.):

We act for Mr Arkell who is Retail Credit Manager of Granada TV Rental Ltd. His attention has been drawn to an article appearing in the issue of Private Eye dated 9th April 1971 on page 4. The statements made about Mr Arkell are entirely untrue and clearly highly defamatory. We are therefore instructed to require from you immediately your proposals for dealing with the matter. Mr Arkell's first concern is that there should be a full retraction at the earliest possible date in Private Eye and he will also want his costs paid. His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply.

Private Eye:

We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr J. Arkell. We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: gently caress off.

[No further reply]

Beekeeping and You posted:

Haha holy gently caress, crowdfunding a lawsuit like that is the dumbest idea I've seen in a while

quote:

The association contended Mr. Bailey was fired for insubordination, suggesting he was too sensitive and was unable to “forgive and forget” certain conduct by his supervisor, Mr. English. Mr. Bailey’s position, however, was that he did not expect to be fired, and that it was unfair to fire him, for complaining about what Mr. English referred to as “pranks” but the ALJ referred to as, for example, “defecating into co-workers’ lunches.”

To be fair, there does not appear to have been testimony that English defecated directly into anyone’s lunch. He testified, rather, that he had “put his own feces into a bag and put the bag into a co-worker’s lunch.” So there was a bag. I mean, he’s not a total barbarian. On the other hand, there was no bag involved when, as he also testified, he once “sat on a catwalk and defecated toward a co-worker in the ditch below him.” (I assume “toward” means his aim was off, thankfully.)

You may be surprised to learn that these are arguably not the worst things this guy did.

Mr. English testified that he “liked a workplace to be fun,” which is why he did these “pranks.” And, sure, it’s fun to be defecated at, but some of this stuff seems questionable. Like, shooting people. English did not use actual firearms, at least, but he did admit he made a “potato gun” out of PVC pipe and would shoot golf balls and other items out of it at work. He testified “that he never shot the gun toward co-workers, and he did not believe that he shot the gun toward areas where coworkers were working.” But Bailey testified he had done that, and the judge found Bailey’s account more credible (on everything) than English’s. English also conceded that he did in fact shoot co-workers with plastic BBs. He did not recall shooting Bailey, but again Bailey testified otherwise. But hey, all in good fun, the shooting. Team-building exercise. Esprit de corps. That’s what it’s all about, my friends. Same with the bombs.

The what?

The bombs.