I can only comment somewhat on this, because I'm going to retain legal counsel and follow their advice regarding what to say and not to say publicly.
However, I will state this:
1) The lawsuit is obviously frivolous. I will vigorously fight this lawsuit, and will not settle under any circumstances.
2) I have never been sued before as a result of anything PokerFraudAlert-related, or related to any forum or social media. However, as an outspoken member of the community who calls out wrongdoing, I have always known that a day like this might come. I am ready to fight this, and am confident that this malicious attempt to silence my speech will not be successful.
are you trolling? You got me on a ruse before don't remember what it was oh yeah something about site being sued but it was a ruse. It was on april 1 btw get the site atty on this imo. Someone should feed his teeth to him analy gl don't think this is a ruse.
Also, it's worth noting that instead of suing Hanson, Polk, Galfond, Little, and Berkey directly, he is suing their LLCs: Crush Live Poker (Hanson), Solve For Why (Berkey), Upswing Poker (Polk), Jonathan Little Holdings (Little), and Run It Once (Galfond).
This appears to be an attempt to reach into deep pockets.
No, this is 100% real.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRANKRIZZO
Also, don't make too much of "John Does 1 to 1000".
That is a standard legal mechanism which allows the plaintiff to dodge the statute of limitations by giving them the ability to add more plaintiffs later.
This is very common in such suits, and shouldn't be read as anything significant.
good thing have the site attorney ben perfect for him
Please make this backfire in that fuckers face.
All vile people I’d laugh to see bankrupt. God I hope he wins.
1. Guess he didnt sue PFA Inc. because he knows that this site operates at a loss.
2. Hope you hire some really fucking expensive lawyer to make this piece of shit bleed out the ass when he has to cover your legal fees...hellllllllllllooooooooooooooooooo attorney beensmokin'!!!
Hi IamProfessionalTalkQuote:
Originally Posted by Hardsports
Why are you under a dupe?
Mason sent him. probably wants an apology he can sticky for yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffHi IamProfessionalTalkQuote:
Originally Posted by Hardsports
Why are you under a dupe?
He should be the one apologizing, after using PFA to post pics of khalwat's kids, just because he doesn't like Bart Hanson. And now somehow I'm the asshole for banning him for doing that callous and shitty thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by FRANKRIZZOMason sent him. probably wants an apology he can sticky for yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
But whatever, I don't want to hijack this thread to talk about that guy.
Well look who it is. Had too many Donairs, tonight Iamproffessional?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardsports
This is so gross, hope you win todd
Some thoughts based on my experience:
1). He sued you to get the info on posters on this forum. Discovery Requests will prove this out. Will you keep their info private? Or will you release it to him? He will try and go after your forum posters. He will shake the tree to see what falls out.
2). He sued you to intimidate and shut you up. And you will fight an inner struggle to be who you are vs. limiting your comments. Not knowing the Defamation laws of your jurisdiction, I would suggest you follow the advice of your counsel.
3). You’re a smart guy. Think things all the way through before you react to what he does, and you’ll come out just fine in the other end of this.
If this guy was cheating then he’s got some brass balls to then take out a law suit against his accusers
It would be next level high risk bluff which makes me think he in fact has the goods.
Relaxed libel laws. The future that Republicans want. Thoughts and prayers.
What a fucking idiot!!! Doesn’t the loser in such lawsuits in the US pay for the legal fees of the winners???
Nope. Druff will be eating these legal fees. Guaranteed.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
It's obvious Mr. Postle wants to "settle" by muzzling all his opponents.Quote:
Originally Posted by JayjamiNope. Druff will be eating these legal fees. Guaranteed.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
How the fuck do you create a single lawsuit with multiple allegations against multiple companies/individuals (all having said disparate things) anyways and expect to win?
Yeah this is smoke and mirrors to try and get everyone to stop talking bad stuff against him.
Please, Anti-SLAPP this mother...
I actually think this might be Postle's play. Sue everyone that exposed him because they will all be out legal fees. Little kick to the nuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by JayjamiNope. Druff will be eating these legal fees. Guaranteed.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Has anyone posted the full docs online yet?
I’ll be happy to do it for Druff, as long as he hands me a $50,000 retainer first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Forum WarsIt's obvious Mr. Postle wants to "settle" by muzzling all his opponents.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayjami
How the fuck do you create a single lawsuit with multiple allegations against multiple companies/individuals (all having said disparate things) anyways and expect to win?
Yeah this is smoke and mirrors to try and get everyone to stop talking bad stuff against him.
Please, Anti-SLAPP this mother...
yes, the loser is ordered to pay...but usually that is bartered away after the judgement: the loser agrees not to appeal to a higher court in exchange for being relieved of the obligation to pay the winner's feesQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Can you explain in layman’s terms why the system is like this?Quote:
Originally Posted by GrenadaRogeryes, the loser is ordered to pay...but usually that is bartered away after the judgement: the loser agrees not to appeal to a higher court in exchange for being relieved of the obligation to pay the winner's feesQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
What has the guy got to lose by suing all these people then if he loses all he has to pay is his own legal fees yet every party in the suit ends up having to pay theirs.
Lose lose situation surely it’s better to not enter a legal battle if you’re Druff as guaranteed to lose money?
the courts are overloaded, the system encourages resolution outside of the court;Quote:
Originally Posted by RegGaymerCan you explain in layman’s terms why the system is like this?Quote:
Originally Posted by GrenadaRoger
What has the guy got to lose by suing all these people then if he loses all he has to pay is his own legal fees yet every party in the suit ends up having to pay theirs.
Lose lose situation surely it’s better to not enter a legal battle if you’re Druff as guaranteed to lose money?
and you're right, its better to avoid getting yourself into trouble so guard your words
I haven’t followed this story since the Veronica interview.
Remember when you were in the 3rd grade and the teacher asked you what you wanted to be when you grew up? You still believed in light regulation like Druff. Maybe you answered you wanted to be a cop or a firefighter or work for the gaming commission. You thought they were like the cops for casinos.
Guy cheats in a casino and everyone is left to fend for themselves.
There is a wee bit of light regulation karma at work here.
Good game. Sorry Druff
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerveza Fria
A guy dumb enough to think he can outsmart cheating a casino would be dumb enough to poke the forum where all the natural trolls with fringe connections to the poker world congregated
jayjami is right, the loser usually does not pay the other side's attorney's fees in the US. it's the "american rule."Quote:
Originally Posted by GrenadaRogeryes, the loser is ordered to pay...but usually that is bartered away after the judgement: the loser agrees not to appeal to a higher court in exchange for being relieved of the obligation to pay the winner's feesQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
this is the opposite of what they do in europe, where the loser usually pays the winner's fees.
its also safe to say that if he somehow ends up in a position to be countersued for fees, it will be on the tail end of such a financial bloodbath that he can just chapter 11 his way out of it and keep on strutting, no?
like
1) convert all liquid assets into crypto
2) fire off a billion frivolous lawsuits
3) either destroy your enemies lives and profit from it, or destroy your enemies lives and have a paper judgement against you that you can claim you lack the resources to pay
i mean how is this not the greatest freeroll of our time?
like the best case scenario here is druff and doug polk and negraneau spending tens of thousands of dollars on lawyers to haggle over how to divvy up this kids collection of pogs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
Veronica interview was cringe worthy. She sounded shady. Druff sounded like he wanted in her pants. It was first time I gave a thought to Postle maybe didn’t do it.
But, Druff makes 30,000 posts. We can’t expect them all to be true. I’m sure the judge will agree.
Could not be bothered to read this navel gazing threadQuote:
Originally Posted by 1marley1Veronica interview was cringe worthy. She sounded shady. Druff sounded like he wanted in her pants. It was first time I gave a thought to Postle maybe didn’t do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanlmar
But, Druff makes 30,000 posts. We can’t expect them all to be true. I’m sure the judge will agree.
but I agree with everything Marley has to say
and i pity any judge or lawyer that has to deal
with one Donald J. Druff
In civil court, the prevailing party is entitled to their costs, not their attorneys’ fees. They are not recoverable unless provided by statute or a contract.Quote:
Originally Posted by GrenadaRogeryes, the loser is ordered to pay...but usually that is bartered away after the judgement: the loser agrees not to appeal to a higher court in exchange for being relieved of the obligation to pay the winner's feesQuote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
Because the entire system is set up to encourage settlement.Quote:
Originally Posted by RegGaymerCan you explain in layman’s terms why the system is like this?Quote:
Originally Posted by GrenadaRoger
What has the guy got to lose by suing all these people then if he loses all he has to pay is his own legal fees yet every party in the suit ends up having to pay theirs.
Lose lose situation surely it’s better to not enter a legal battle if you’re Druff as guaranteed to lose money?
What is with these lengthy thread titles?
Who the fuck is running this joint?
Oh no does this mean Postle will be running PFA soon?
There's only a limited number of things I can say, for obvious reasons.
BUT
I have the complaint. I believe I am the only person in poker who has it right now. I have not been served.
There is a lot more to this situation than appears on the surface. Let's just say that.
Relax. Forget retaining an attorney....this suit will be thrown out on the first hearing before a judge as frivolous. This piece of garbage is trying to use Verstanding's statement as his only "proof" that you defamed him, and he's going to fail miserably.