AEAE RELEASES THE NAME OF A BRYAN CAVE LLP PARTNER, ATTORNEY RODNEY PERRY WHO IS RATED AS NOT recommended

3/21/2010

CHICAGO-(AEAE)-THE BRYAN CAVE LLP LAW FIRM FILED THEIR on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank opposite Stoller in a RICO action that was filed a month ago in Chicago Illinois. Bryan Cave also represents Bank of America in another action is facing Indirect Criminal Contempt Charges for perjury, false swearing and subornation of perjury. It is interesting that Senior Counsel Steven R. Smith name is NOT on the pleading, a new “tough” guy Rodney Perry http://www.bryancave.com/rrperry/ has now stepped up to the plate.

But Smith's “bag man” Michael J. Werich has signed the request for an extension of time in the new case. Michael J. Werich has also charge with subornation of perjury in the Bank of America Case. The Americans for the Enforcement of Attorneys (AEAE) a legal ethics attorney watch dog group since 1974 maintains a list of attorneys that are not recommended. Rodney Perry names has appeared on this list for the last several years. The question is whether Rodney Perry is really a “new” Bryan Cave partner who is nothing more than a “front” man for Steven R. Smith pictured below. If any one has information on Rodney Perry, Steven R. Smith or Michael J. Werich and would like to share it you can email [email protected]

LEGAL NOTICE: The attorney ratings by AEAE is their opinion, based upon attorney disciplinary reports, complaints received by third parties, and members experiences directly with attorneys. AEAE has maintained a national data base of attorneys who have been rated unqualified or not recommended since 1974. AEAE also list the Firm of Bryan Cave LLP as “not” recommended.

8 Comments

EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY
Internships not available now

Help the Equal Justice Party www. equaljusticeparty.org a registered political party in Illinois, support conservative candidates and endorses AEAE. Contribute today!
FREE SPEECH ON THE NET IS NOT 'FREE'. PEOPLE GO TO JAIL FOR BLOGGING ALL OF THE TIME. THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY IS FIGHTING TO MAINTAIN THE FIRST AMENDMENT WHICH IS SUPPOSE TO GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF SPEECH. , the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content." Police Dep't of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 95, 33 L. Ed. 2d 212, 92 S. Ct. 2286 (1972); see also Consolidated Edison Co. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 530, 537, 65 L. Ed. 2d 319, 100 S. Ct. 2326 (1980)

YOU CAN SUPPORT FREEDOM OF SPEECH BY SUPPORTING THE EQUAL JUSTICE PARTY. DONATE ON-LINE
Supporting Equal Justice Party helps to maintain the Internet a free voice and EJ supports the First Amendment of the U.S Constitution.
The Equal Justice Party (EJ) is a registered Political Action Committee in Chicago, Illinois S 10127 L 15656. The EJ supports conservative causes, conservative candidates, small government.
Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) www.rentamark.net is a not for profit group that supports Equal Justice www.equaljustice.org and advocates the strict enforcement of attorney ethics since 1974.
The purpose of the AEAE Blog is to exalt the law, by holding to the fundamental right of “Equal Justice” for all. It keeps “watch” on attorney and judicial misconduct issues, evolving trademark and constitutional law. It assures all people with the “good news” that in American “right” will prevail especially for those who “never” give-up “fighting” to obtain “justice”. This site adheres to the Law and the Constitution as its authority. The AEAE, is a attorney rating Service. The comments made by AEAE are not actionable because they are statements of opinion Moriarty v. Greene 732 N.E.2d 730, 740 Ill.App), citing Owen v. Can 497 N.E.2d 1145, 1148 (Ill.1986) see Law offices of David Freydin,PC v Vitoria Chamara et al No 18-3216 Seventh Circuit No 18-3216 decided 01-28-2022.
Ratings are non-actionable opinion statements David Freydin,PC v Vitoria Chamara et al citing Syngenta Seeds Inc v. Bung North America,Inc 773 F.3d 58 (8th Cir 2014) Illinois Law on expressions of Opinion , an unexplained one star review simply could not be actionable as defamation David Freydin case citing Cf. Kimzey v. Yelp!Inc. 836 F. 3d 1263, 1269-70 (9th Cir 2016)
AEAE LEGAL ETHICS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY EXPERTS, valuations, expert
witness testimony, trademark surveys, brief writer, Appellate Expert.
The author(s) graduated from Mayville State College with a BS Degree, North Dakota State University, MASTERS DEGREE and attended the University of Iowa a for a PHD. The Author(s) are the nation's most renowned
Legal Ethics experts and Intellectual Property Entrepreneur(s) with many years of experience in the field of brief writing, trademarks, licensing and
enforcement, expert witness testimony, trademark valuation Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics (AEAE) an attorney watch dog group since 1974. AEAE has appeared on FOX NEWS, CBS and in
numerous national news papers including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Sun Times etc and on many radio talk shows. AEAE accepts political contributions. AEAE, P.O. Box 60645, Chicago, Illinois 60660. Email [email protected]
312-545-4554
Copyright AEAE 2017, all rights reserved. AEAE accepts no liability for incorrect or inaccurate information appearing here. The opinions expressed here are those o f AEAE Use of this site is subject to our "terms of use" which is published here. Nothing can be duplicated without written permission.
"Litigation is the Sea We swim in,
Litigation is the Air We Breathe
Litigation is War,
Welcome to the Front!"

To Prove Defamation Case?
What Do You Have To Prove? There are two things you have to prove to be true in order to win a case of defamation of character in the court of law. First of all, you have to prove without a doubt that what was said or written about you is not true. Once you have proved that the statement is, in fact, false you have to prove that the other person said the false statement with the intent of causing you some form of harm.
The Fair Reporting Privilege is a defense to any claim of Defamation

The Fair Report Privilege applies to the information contained on this web site.

“[T]he fair report privilege has two requirements: (1) the report must be of an official proceeding; and (2) the report must be complete and accurate or a fair abridgment of the official proceeding. [Citation.] *** For a publication to be considered a fair abridgment, the report must convey to readers a substantially correct account of the official proceedings. [Citation.] A reporter is not privileged to make additions of his own that would convey a defamatory impression or to indict expressly or by innuendo the veracity or integrity of any of the parties. [Citation.] Finally, it is the accuracy of the summary, not the truth or falsity of the information being summarized, that is the benchmark of the privilege. [Citation.]” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Eubanks, 397 Ill. App. 3d at 749 (citing Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558, 588-90 (2006)). ¶ 30
AEAE argues it reports on the law and law suits and it is the intent of AEAE to "fairly report" these official proceedings.

AEAE has the legal right to evaluate and rate attorneys, government officials, College educators, business leaders See JOHN HENRY BROWNE, et al., AVVO, INC., et al Case No. C07-0920RSL UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 18th day of December, 2007. A Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge

VERITAS OMNIA VINCIT

DISCLAIMER: The AEAE does not provide legal services or legal advice. Discussions of legal principles and authority, including, but not limited to, constitutional provisions, statutes, legislative enactments, court rules, case law, and common-law doctrines are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.

Stoller Loves Dick

3/19/2010 05:06:48 pm

Wow, this AEAE sure is impressive. I'm sure it is just a coincidence that every lawyer who turns out to be not recommended by the AEAE is or has been adverse to the little man's frivolous suits. Even more remarkable is that its director, Chris Stoller (yes, Leo's brother), is doing time in Arizona and taking it up the ass in his cell as we speak. How Chris is able to do such in depth research into attorney competence while sexually satisfying his fellow inmates is truly an accomplishment. I think Leo's next delusional post about his make believe Lake Michigan cruises with his make believe girlfriend should include an explanation of this for all of us.

Counterpoint

3/19/2010 05:31:11 pm

For over 30 years now everyone knows the game, if they want to "play" they are going to "pay". The smart ones avoid getting involved, but there is always that "young" buck that believes that he can take on the "old" guy. He ends up destroying his reputation and what ever he thinks he can win, he learns in the "end" it wasn't worth the battle! Batter up!

The Bull

3/20/2010 12:00:35 am

Batter up?? give it up Leo. These guys are all lawyers they did the time to become lawyers, they were tested and passed, they play in the big leagues. Your not allowed thier. N says you couldn't do law school so you try to play in the same game, you are no where close.

By the way she also says you were so obese that your gut sucked in your dick so it looked like it only had a head. Must have been quite a sight.

By the way, tonight very late tonight we are going to have a "party" up on the fifth floor...think abbout that

3/20/2010 01:33:28 am

Rodney looks pretty cute. Maybe I should call him to tell all I know

More "free" legal work for me babe........................

Leo the Clown

3/20/2010 05:38:18 am

Leo, why don't you just wear a clown suit and pedal around in circles outside the Daley Center on one of those mini tricycles. You could squeeze your bicycle horn and yell to passersby how you are a legal expert and dedicate yourself to the enforcement of ethics in the legal profession. It would have the same effect as anything you say on this blog, anything you file with the ARDC, or anything you do in the courts.

You are a complete joke and everyone knows it--
judges, lawyers, your children, your family, the ARDC, anyone who reads this blog, the hot dog vendors near the courthouse.. Way to wallow in the attention of being a complete laughingstock, Leo.

Strategy

3/21/2010 02:42:33 pm

The average defendant will spend a million dollars over the course of the litigation, is that something to laugh about? Anyone who can cause a party to spend a "million" dollars to defend itself, probably can be considered by those outside of the case as a "laughting" stock, but the defendents are hard pressed to find much humor in having to blow that much dough. And there has "never" been one lawyer who has represented an opponent who found that experience to be worth the fee that they were paid. Just talk to them if they feel he is just a "laughting stock!"

Chickenhead Leo

3/21/2010 07:36:53 pm

Yawn. There was a lot of humor in destroying you in court. Reading your third-grade writing skills was one. Watching the judge constantly warn you about your misconduct was another. Knowing that your case would inevitably dismissed was yet another. The only thing that wasn't funny was your foul smell. You smell like a corpse. Don't you have a shower in that closet you live in?

stollerexposed.blog.com link

3/28/2010 11:49:44 am

Billy Big Head

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics