Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics

  • SUE THE BASTARDS
  • AEAE
  • AEJE
  • AEIPR
  • Rentamark
  • Archrive
  • PAGE 2
 

Brooke Mueller now is demanding an additional $1 million from Charlie Sheen in order to \"make\" up

12/31/2009

5 Comments

 
Picture
CHARLES SHEEN'S wife Brooke Mueller now is demanding an additional $1 million to her prenuptial agreement according to a report. Brooke said if Tiger Woods wife got 78 million, Charlie Sheen can give me at least another million. Brooke said that she would then have her lawyer Yale Galanter file a motion to modify the restraining order against Sheen so that they can get together and try to resolve their issues privately in their bedroom. Brooke said that they are very much in love however before she is willing to attempt work anything out she wants to see Charlie's “good” faith by depositing a million dollars in her private checking account according to a report. Brook said, “I might start to like Charlie again.”
UPDATE:  January 1, 2010 And another one bites the dust! It looks like Charlie Sheen and his wife Brooke Mueller are headed to divorce court after all. We have now learned that  “Brooke’s been wanting a divorce for at least two months, but she was holding out until Charlie signed a new contract [for his sitcom],” according to one  source. Charlie reportedly threatened to kill Brooke on Christmas with a knife after  she told him that she wanted a divorce . Just days after the altercation, Brooke was seen partying at a club with another younger movie star that she has been spending her nights with according to the same source, "Brooke is such a "sweet" girl."
 


5 Comments

CYBER-BULLYING MAY BE CRUEL, BUT IT IS CONSTITUTIONAL

12/31/2009

4 Comments

 
Picture
LOS ANGELS- A US District judge in LA sided with the student, saying the school went too far. Amid rising concerns over cyber-bullying, and even calls for criminalization, some courts, parents, and free speech advocates are pushing back - students, they say, have a First Amendment right to be nasty in cyberspace . A recent LA Times article reported that a Beverly Hills school suspended an 8th grade student who posted a video on YouTube with several other students calling yet another student "spoiled," a "brat," and a "slut." Read the article here.
The suspended student took the case to federal court, saying her free speech rights had been violated. See J.C. v. Beverly Hills Unified School District, Case No. 08-cv-03824, California, U.S. District Court (2009). Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen V. Wilson sided with her. "To allow the school to cast this wide a net and suspend a student simply because another student takes offense to their speech, without any evidence that such speech caused a substantial disruption of the school's activities, runs afoul of the law," wrote Judge Wilson in a 60 page opinion.
 Click here to read the court's decision http://lawyersusaonline.com/wp-files/pdfs/jc-v-beverly-hills.pdf  mohttp://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/12/14/judge_rules_students_cruel_remarks_online_are_not_unconstitutional/This decision.



This decisionhis decision

“
4 Comments

CHARLIE SHEEN AND HIS WIFE BROOKE DECIDED TO RECONCILE

12/31/2009

1 Comment

 
Picture
ASPEN, COLORADO-CHRISTMAS DAY 2009 Charlie Sheen, 44, who starred in films including Platoon and Wall Street, was arrested in the ski resort of Aspen following an argument with his wife of 19 months, Brooke Mueller, 32. Charlie Sheen's was arrest in Aspen, Colo., for allegedly placing a knife against wife Brooke Mueller's throat after he sat down for dinner. His wife told Sheen, “I have something to tell you.” Sheen said, “Don't bother me I watching a football game.” Brooke said, “I want a divorce!” Sheen said, “I can't hear you, my team is on the one yard line.” Brooke screemed “I want a divorce!” “You what?” “I want a divorce!”

“You tell me this while I'm watching my football game on Christmas!”

“I want a divorce!”

It is reported that Sheen then took a knife and held it to Brooke's neck and said, “I sue you for the rest of you life if you divorce me!”

Brooke said, “I rather have you kill me!”

Sheen said, “Suing you would be more fun!”

Brooke called 911 and had he husband locked up. Sheen posted $8,000 bond and was released. Threatening to have Brooked sued for the rest of her life isn't enough to break up their marriage. Seems they have decided reconciliation is the way to go. "Brooke and Charlie are very passionate about each other, they love each other and want to try and save their marriage," Mueller's attorney, Yale Galanter, told People magazine on Wednesday. "They had a bad night and want to get beyond it.

Some women who can't, do spend the “rest of their lives in court as defendants” according to a report at www.law.com
1 Comment

ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF STOLLLER

12/30/2009

6 Comments

 
Picture
CHICAGO-(AEAE)-STOLLER WAS INCARCERATED IN THE ILLINOIS COOK COUNTY JAIL FOR 37 days from June 8, 2009 until July 15, 2009 for the “crime” of blogging on the Internet. In order for Stoller to be released he was forced, under undue influence, to sign a series of agreements in a domestic case. Agreements that he “never” would have agreed to but for the fact that “if he agreed to sign those agreements, he would be released from the custody of the Cook County Department of Corrections”. Stoller was released on July 16, 2009 at 1:00AM. In the morning of that day Stoller filed an appeal with the Illinois Appellate Court to set aside the coerced agreements. One of the attorneys on the other side filed a motion before the Appellate Court requesting that the Illinois Appellate Court dismiss Stoller's appeal based upon the alleged “agreed” order of dismissal that Stoller under pressure signed. Today the Illinois Appellate Court denied the Appellee's motion to dismiss Stoller's appeal based upon the “phony” agreements. Stay tuned this case is heating up
6 Comments

JOHN WELCH TO PLAY CHRISTOPHER STOLLER

12/30/2009

2 Comments

 
Picture
CHICAGO-(AEAE)-IN THE NEW MOVIE THE LEO STOLLER STORY, IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT JOHN WELCH be offered the role of Stoller's brother, Christopher. John is originally from Chicago and is still a White Sox fan, just like Christopher Stoller. The producer thinks John would be perfect for the part. John has been an "actor" all of his life playing the lead part as a trademark authority. John writes the www.ttablog.com  What do you think?  Please leave your comments
2 Comments

Federal Statute for honest services fraud is too broad

12/30/2009

1 Comment

 
Picture
WASHINGTON D.C. (AEAE)- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has said the federal statute for honest services fraud is too broad, joking that it could make a crime out of an employee phoning in sick so he could slip off to a ball game.
A recent hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court has many legal experts believing the high court is poised to strike down the statute, which makes it illegal for public officials to fraudulently deprive constituents of honest services.
1 Comment

GORDON AND REES REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE WHETHER THEY WILL CONTINUE TO REPRESENT LANCE G. JOHNSON IN CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PROCEEDING

12/30/2009

3 Comments

 
Picture
CHICAGO-(AEAE)-WASHINGTON D.C. ATTORNEY LANCE G. JOHNSON, DAVID ABRAMS AND ALFRED GOODMAN HAVE FINDLY BEEN SERVED WITH SUMMONS AND A CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION. CHICAGO-(AEAE)-WASHINGTON D.C. ATTORNEY LANCE G. JOHNSON, DAVID ABRAMS AND ALFRED GOODMAN HAVE FINDLY BEEN SERVED WITH SUMMONS AND A CRIMINAL CONTEMPT PETITION http://www.filefront.com/14756757/Lance-G.-Johnson-Charged-with-perjury0001.pdf/.   Today their Chicago Law firm of Gordon and Rees, who also have been charged in the same criminal contempt petition refuse to acknowledge if they will continue to represent Johnson, Abrams and Goodman. A spokesman for the Law firm who called Stoller refused to comment any further.

Stoller is exploring a Civil Racketeering count against Gordon and Rees and Lance G. Johnson, David Abrams and Alfred Goodman and is currently researching the law on that issue. In Stoller's opinion he feels he can plead a RICO count in an amended complaint but want to devote some addition time in his law library to make sure that the RICO count will “stick”.

Legal Disclaimer: Lance G. Johnson, David Abams, Alfred Goodman and the Gordon and Rees law firm are considered inocient until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 

 
Picture
3 Comments

GEORGE CLOONEY TO PLAY LEO STOLLER?

12/29/2009

11 Comments

 
Picture
HOLLYWOOD, CALF (AEAE)- SOME OF THE PRODUCERS WHO CLAIM TO HAVE MADE THE MOVIE, JULIE AND JULIA, THE STORY OF A BLOGGER WHO PREPARED ALL OF JULIA CHILD'S RECEIPTS ON HER BLOG. JULIA POWELL STORY WAS MADE INTO A MOVIE. THE PRODUCERS CONTACTED A REPRESETATIVE OF LEO STOLLER IN ORDER TO DISCUSS FILMING STOLLER'S NEW BOOK JUICE FOR PEANUTS. Stoller's blog www.rentamark.net has attracted the attention of several Hollywood Producers who have offered to make a movie of Stoller's story. George Clooney was suggested to play Stoller and the movie would be directed by Guentin Tarantiono. No final script has been approved yet and no deal has been finalized. Stay tuned...who do you think should play Stoller "love" interest, leave your comments below...
11 Comments

STOLLER MOVES BEFORE THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF MACK BAR

12/28/2009

4 Comments

 
Picture
CHICAGO-(AEAE)-STOLLER HAS MOVED BEFORE THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THEIR Mack” bar. Stoller argues that the said Mack bar is unconstitutional on its face. It deprives a party of its due process and equal protection guaranteed under the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. In the alternative Stoller argues that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals should stay its Mack bar, pending Stoller's appeal to the United States Supreme Court. Thirdly Stoller argues that in the alternative, Stoller should be allowed to proceed with its current court actions and the Mack bar should be modified to comply with the U.S Constitution.


 
4 Comments

STOLLER FILES HIS APPEAL BRIEF IN THE WEBER CASE IN THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT, WEBER FILES A CROSS APPEAL

12/27/2009

6 Comments

 
Picture
CHICAGO-(AEAE)-ILLINOIS CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE THOMSA DUDGEON ISSUED AN EX PARTE ORDER ON JULY 9, 2009 GRANTING A JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF RQYMOND H. WEBER FOR Sixteen Thousand Dollars in a contested guardianship case. Raymond H. Weber a convicted felon and “ward” sought an accounting in a guarding ship case. Judge Dudgeon granted judgment in favor of Weber stating that the Probate Act “trumps” the Illinois Power of Attorney Act. Stoller has filed his Appeal brief. Weber who is represented by Prairie Legal Services filed a cross appeal. Stoller had charged Weber and his attorney Laura Myers Esq., with indirect criminal contempt for attempting to defraud the court and the surety company out of over $30,000. Judge Dudgeon denied Weber's motion for reconsideration and denied awarding Weber any additional funds. Notwithstanding Weber and Prairie Legal Services filed a cross appeal seeking an additional $30,000 which according to Stoller brief is a “clear” fraud on the Court and the Surety Company. Weber's appeal brief is due January 26, 2010. Stay tuned this is an interesting case which should make “new” law.
6 Comments
<<Previous

    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
    LEGAL ETHICS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY EXPERT, 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 ldms4@hotmail.com
    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.


    Archives

    May 2023
    April 2023
    March 2023
    February 2023
    July 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    October 2021
    July 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    June 2019
    April 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    January 2015
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009

    Categories
    Disclaimer This website is not a solicitation for business. All content on the AEAE website is intended to provide general information about AEAE and an opportunity for interested  persons to contact AEAE. The content of this website is not offered as legal advice or legal opinion and it should not be relied upon for any specific situation.  AEAE is not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney client relationship is intended.  This website is for informational purposes only and does not constitute a complete description of AEAE services. While AEAE endeavors to keep the information updated and correct, AEAE makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the information contained in this website. 

    All
    Jewelry Frauds
    Scams
    Yellow Diamonds

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.