I've started the ball rolling

You are wrong........

jay helfert said:
This exactly what any competent attorney does first, prior to launching litigation. Sends a warning threatening legal remedies, if there is no compliance with prior agreements or promises made to the injured parties. Injured parties in this case being the pool players.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is not the way it is done. A competent attorney gets all his facts together, sends a letter to mediate things first, and then if everything else fails legal action is taken.

But you don't go on public record giving out your strategy to your opponent. That is a huge mistake........
 
NYC cue dude said:
Dr dissent,

Your kidding, right?

Surely you know that I am NOT bringing suit against kt. In class action, in this case, the agrieved pool players, are the ones bringing suit. I have done nothing more than facilitate brining attorney's and clients together. I am not deposable, as I make no claims to personal injustices.

Furthermore, any civil code or criminal laws that have already been broken are mostly a matter of public record. The rest will be detrmined through discovery. It is no longer in my hands, or KT's for that matter to change, alter or hide anything. Even if there was evidence tampering, the things the attorneys said, cant be covered up.

But the real kicker is this, kt probably already knows that this wont go unanswered. No real surpirses here.

rg
Click to expand...

No, I'm not kidding. You don't go on public record saying you will go after anyone, and that is exactly what you did. From your posting, you are an interested (injured) party, therefore, deposable.

As I said before, you better get copy of these posting to your lawyers and ensure you are not damaging any possible case.
 
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd be interested to know whether it is illegal to state that the prize funds were guaranteed by a major accounting firm when this was not the case (and if so how illegal). It sounds like something that ought to be against the law, but like I said I'm no lawyer. Also, like everything else about the IPT, it wasn't signed or anything, it was just posted on the website Q+A section (I think) which was subsequently taken down. Who knows. But it's one thing for the IPT to guarantee $100k to every player next year and then go bankrupt, in that case the guarantee (I would guess) would be moot because there is no company anymore, and (I would also guess) there's some LLC structure going on where KT is not personally liable for any IPT guarantees. On the other hand, to claim that a third party was guaranteeing the money when this was not the case is a different matter, because the third-party guarantee thing is basically designed to ensure that the money is there even if you do go bankrupt.

The major accounting firm thing always seemed weird to me. I mean if I go to the trouble of getting a major accounting firm to guarantee something, I'm sure as hell going to mention which accounting firm is the one guaranteeing the money instead of making cryptic assertions.
 
All of this will be water under the bridge when the players have been paid.
I assure you that none of the players will be thinking about "LEGAL ACTION"
When they're playing in the Chicago tournament!!!!!!!!!!
 
Dr. Dissent said:
Sorry, but this is not the way it is done. A competent attorney gets all his facts together, sends a letter to mediate things first, and then if everything else fails legal action is taken.

But you don't go on public record giving out your strategy to your opponent. That is a huge mistake........
Click to expand...

Isn't that what I just said? Send a letter, attempt to resolve the issue, and then seek legal remedies.
We seem to be in agreement Doc. Or shall we go to court to work out the semantics?
 
Last edited:
ineedaspot said:
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd be interested to know whether it is illegal to state that the prize funds were guaranteed by a major accounting firm when this was not the case (and if so how illegal). It sounds like something that ought to be against the law, but like I said I'm no lawyer. Also, like everything else about the IPT, it wasn't signed or anything, it was just posted on the website Q+A section (I think) which was subsequently taken down. Who knows. But it's one thing for the IPT to guarantee $100k to every player next year and then go bankrupt, in that case the guarantee (I would guess) would be moot because there is no company anymore, and (I would also guess) there's some LLC structure going on where KT is not personally liable for any IPT guarantees. On the other hand, to claim that a third party was guaranteeing the money when this was not the case is a different matter, because the third-party guarantee thing is basically designed to ensure that the money is there even if you do go bankrupt.

The major accounting firm thing always seemed weird to me. I mean if I go to the trouble of getting a major accounting firm to guarantee something, I'm sure as hell going to mention which accounting firm is the one guaranteeing the money instead of making cryptic assertions.
Click to expand...

The major accounting firm is Hocus, Pocus, Fucus and Ducus. I'm sure you've heard of them.
 
Dr. Dissent...<<Sorry, but this is not the way it is done. A competent attorney gets all his facts together, sends a letter to mediate things first, and then if everything else fails legal action is taken.>>

This is entirely incorrect. The heart of this claim is a breach of contract action. Most contracts provide for an Notice of breach and an opportunity to cure before legal action is permitted. Even in an oral contract or a written one without a Notice and Cure provision, it is exceptionally wise to issue a Notice and Demand letter anyway.

There are always exceptions that prove the rule but in the vast majority of cases, the "stealth" strategy you suggest is neither appropriate or useful. KT has spent a significant portion of his adult life embroiled in legal disputes and while he may or may not be a compulsive liar, he certainly is not stupid and began to take any and all legal steps to protect himself LONG ago.

But while agreeing almost entirely with NYC Dude I would point out a somewhat minor technical disagreement. He wrote that the aggrieved pool players...plural...would bring the class action suit. In fact, there must first be an initial plaintiff and THEN once suit is filed on behalf of that plaintiff, the lawyers would seek to have the matter certified as a Class Action. While the initial "lead plaintiff" does not have to be one person necessarily, there are typically not more than a few.

Again, not an important distinction but I thought worth mentioning in the sense that SOME player or a few players are going to have to become the initial plaintiff(s).
Regards,
Jim
 
av84fun said:
Dr. Dissent...<<Sorry, but this is not the way it is done. A competent attorney gets all his facts together, sends a letter to mediate things first, and then if everything else fails legal action is taken.>>

This is entirely incorrect. The heart of this claim is a breach of contract action. Most contracts provide for an Notice of breach and an opportunity to cure before legal action is permitted. Even in an oral contract or a written one without a Notice and Cure provision, it is exceptionally wise to issue a Notice and Demand letter anyway.

There are always exceptions that prove the rule but in the vast majority of cases, the "stealth" strategy you suggest is neither appropriate or useful. KT has spent a significant portion of his adult life embroiled in legal disputes and while he may or may not be a compulsive liar, he certainly is not stupid and began to take any and all legal steps to protect himself LONG ago.

But while agreeing almost entirely with NYC Dude I would point out a somewhat minor technical disagreement. He wrote that the aggrieved pool players...plural...would bring the class action suit. In fact, there must first be an initial plaintiff and THEN once suit is filed on behalf of that plaintiff, the lawyers would seek to have the matter certified as a Class Action. While the initial "lead plaintiff" does not have to be one person necessarily, there are typically not more than a few.

Again, not an important distinction but I thought worth mentioning in the sense that SOME player or a few players are going to have to become the initial plaintiff(s).
Regards,
Jim
Click to expand...

Jim,

Can I hire you to represent me? Actually, there are some pretty good legal minds at work here. And they are not necessarily practicing attorneys.

I have written many of my own contracts with major casinos. And the person representing the casino has looked at it and said, "You have a good attorney". I just say thanks, have been with him for years.
 
hi guys

this is just my two cents im just a poolplayer.i dont know anything about all this legal stuff ,but shouldnt we wait until the chicago tourney before people start attacking him.again i know randy is looking out for the players.but you know kevin has done more for me in a year than anybody in pool ever.i say lets give him some room to work his magic .
 
jay helfert said:
Isn't that what I just said? Send a letter, attempt to resolve the issue, and then seek legal remedies.
We seem to be in agreement Doc. Or shall we go to court to work out the semantics?
Click to expand...

Jay you said that the lawyer "sends a warning threatening legal remedies."
The lawyer should not "threat" anyone in their first letter, they should "suggest" or "invite" to remedy a situation. When you get no possitive response to resolve the issue, the lawyer "informs" the party that they will take the necessary steps to obtain a remedy to the "full extent of the law".

Yes, it does in fact have to do with "semantics." These days, taking matters into court requires that the parties prove that there was/were not any bargaining in "good faith" before filing legal remedies in a court.
 
Dr Dissent...<<Yes, it does in fact have to do with "semantics." These days, taking matters into court requires that the parties prove that there was/were not any bargaining in "good faith" before filing legal remedies in a court.>>

Sorry but that is entirely incorrect. In fact, any discussions that might have taken place regarding a settlement of the dispute...which discussion ARE NOT required...are INADMISSIBLE and the judge would not take kindly to any attempt to put any such information before the court.

If you can cite any statute or case law to the contrary I would be interested but save yourself some time and consult Rule 408 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which are adopted in virtually all state courts.

As for any requirement of pre-filing negotiations, where "in good faith or not" I would also appreciate your posting your authority for that notion.

Jim
 
ineedaspot said:
But it's one thing for the IPT to guarantee $100k to every player next year and then go bankrupt, in that case the guarantee (I would guess) would be moot because there is no company anymore, .
Click to expand...

If anyone has a copy of the player's meeting at KOTH, I believe KT stated that he would "PERSONALLY" guarantee that each tour card holder would make the $100K...if they didn't make that much, he would make up the difference. I don't think he can hide behind the corporation on that one.
Steve
 
Just a thought....if I were an IPT player, and I did FINALLY receive the monies due me from Reno, I sure as hell wouldn't particiapte in Chicago just to have KT stiff me all over again!!!

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Lisa
 
Last edited:
john schmidt said:
this is just my two cents im just a poolplayer.i dont know anything about all this legal stuff ,but shouldnt we wait until the chicago tourney before people start attacking him.again i know randy is looking out for the players.but you know kevin has done more for me in a year than anybody in pool ever.i say lets give him some room to work his magic .
Click to expand...


Well, there you have it. An IPT player who is behind Kevin and is not interested in legal action. I imagine Linda and Mike would also agree with him. Probably many more IPT members also agree.

If that is the case then it is time to just forget everything and go on with our lives.

Besides people who have no standing in the case, in other words are not IPT players, or someone who has been harmed by the IPT, can not even file any legal action.

Refresh. Refresh. Now, where is that damn drink?

Jake
 
jjinfla said:
Well, there you have it. An IPT player who is behind Kevin and is not interested in legal action. I imagine Linda and Mike would also agree with him. Probably many more IPT members also agree.

If that is the case then it is time to just forget everything and go on with our lives.

Besides people who have no standing in the case, in other words are not IPT players, or someone who has been harmed by the IPT, can not even file any legal action.

Refresh. Refresh. Now, where is that damn drink?

Jake
Click to expand...

Well, I say if John S. and certain others don't want to be part of the impending action, then they can just wait for KT to pay them, heh heh.

I'm just floating a situation out there. Say 25 or so players from Reno get together, legal notice is sent to KT, and he decides to pay them within the week to avoid further action.

And no money to the others who didn't give notice. And they are still twisting in the wind.

Not showing solidarity may just hurt you in the long run, Johnny boy. He's lied multiple times, and he may slip away if you don't start action now.

Russ
 
ridewiththewind said:
Just a thought....if I were an IPT player, and I did FINALLY receive the monies due me from Reno, I sure as hell wouldn't particiapte in Chicago just to have KT stiff me all over again!!!

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

Lisa
Click to expand...

I would. I would show up just for the turkey sandwiches and the fans. I would not make any financial commitments based on the money I thought I won though.

I would also be staying at the motel 6.

Cheers,
RC
 
Russ Chewning said:
Not showing solidarity may just hurt you in the long run, Johnny boy. He's lied multiple times, and he may slip away if you don't start action now.

Russ
Click to expand...
I don't think being condescending to John or any of the players about this particular matter is warranted. They're in a tough spot and you, just like the majority of us here are on the outside looking in. It's real easy to say what you would do if you were them but you're not them and you're not having to deal with these issues on a personal level.

If legal action is taken and a player(s) decides not to join in, that's their prerogative and they have their own personal reasons for making a personal decision based on what they feel is best for them.

The life of a pool player might be a better place to be today had the players of yesterday formed solidarity. They didn't and they haven't to date. Hopefully one day we'll see a stronger more unified group as opposed to everyone having to look out for themselves. I don't think forcing and belittling them into legal action is the best way to get solidarity. JMO
 
What will a player like JS do if, he gets paid for Reno but before the Chicago tournament KT makes him sign a document stating that he can't bring any lawsuit against him in the future in reference to the IPT or he can't play?
 
watchez said:
What will a player like JS do if, he gets paid for Reno but before the Chicago tournament KT makes him sign a document stating that he can't bring any lawsuit against him in the future in reference to the IPT or he can't play?
Click to expand...


My guess is that it would be unenforceable. I dont think you can sign away your right to sue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top