STOLLER MOVES TO COMPEL ILLINOIS ATTORNEY ROBERT TEPPER TO APPEAR AT A DEPOSITION

10/27/2009

CHICAGO-(AEAE)-ATTORNEY ROBERT TEPPER REFUSED TO ATTEND HIS DEPOSITION TODAY. Mr. Tepper was kind enough to call Stoller and inform him that he would not be attending his deposition noticed by Stoller. Stoller told Mr. Tepper that he would be move to “compel” his deposition.
Stoller's Motion for leave to file an Indirect Direct Criminal Contempt proceeding against Attorney Lance G. Johnson, Alfred Goodman and David Abrams from the Washington D.C Law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo and Goodman www.roylance is up today before Illinois Circuit Court Judge Kathy Flanagan.
Stoller filed a Motion before Illinois Circuit Court Judge Michale Hyman in his divorce proceeding which is up on Nov 3rd 2009 at 9:30 AM.
In addition Stoller has released a barrage of Subpoenas, like Scud
missiles into the enemys camp. Stoller is ready to file contempt charges against those who fail to properly respond.

SIDEBAR: Trust is an important quality in a business partner, a spouse, a friend, a candidate. It is important for all the readers of this blog to note that when Stoller says on this blog that he is going to sue someone, hold them in contempt, charge them with attorney disciplinary charges and/or Indirect Criminal Contempt Charges, as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, Stoller will follow through with all charges, motions, complaints which are acknowledge here. Stoller is a man of his word, if he says that he will sue a party, that party will be sued and the case will be litigated until the “last court speaks”! This sidebar is response to some readers who might have doubted Stoller's willingness to follow through with his prognostications of doom and gloom.

12 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.

Perry Mason

10/26/2009 10:52:06 am

Willingness to follow through on an action and achieving a successful verdict are two very different things.

Jack

10/26/2009 11:16:41 am

Thats why they call you Perry Mason...knowing what you want is the first step to getting it...

10/26/2009 12:44:42 pm

Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry said, "Man's got to know his limitations."

Leo The Toadstool

10/26/2009 02:27:07 pm

More delusional Stoller drivel. Stoller is the very definition of lack of credibility. Just look up the court decisions about him. Just like his posts, they make clear the buffoon that he is.

10/26/2009 03:40:46 pm

Toad without darkness there is "no" light, without "evil" Toad, there is "no" goodness, and without Stoller you wouldn't exist...

10/26/2009 04:03:20 pm

Jack, your delusions expose you as Stoller (and of course the fact that your comment is highlighted in blue).

Chip Douglas

10/27/2009 04:45:46 am

Have you noticed how Leo talks in circles and never directly answers a question?

I can't imagine living a life where one gets off on filing bogus litigation just to mess with other innocent people.

Dan Web

10/27/2009 03:37:53 pm

One man's bogus litigation is another man "just" cause. I remember a case where I represented a small child who fell off a Santa Claus's lap in a shopping center breaking her leg. Everyone thought it was a "frivilious" law suit suing Santa, accept the parents of the injured girl. There is no such thing as "bogus" litigation only anarchy when a party has "no" court system to address their controversies like Iraq....

Anon

10/27/2009 05:42:18 pm

Leo/Rita/Dan, once I got past all your random quotation marks and wholesale lack of grammar, I realized just how illuminating your example is. But I suspect you're misrembering the story. I'm pretty sure what really happened was that when you were a small child, you sat on Santa's lap and Santa, startled by your attempt to serve him with a meritless lawsuit, accidentally dropped you, which resulted in the untreated, rampant brain damage we all see in you to this day.

Rita

10/28/2009 05:37:40 pm

I believe that Anon must have been a film critic at one time who "never" gave any movie review over one star, was fired and now finds himself in a position in which he cannot give Stoller even "1" star for anything...It is obvious that he can't stay away from that California "water"...

10/29/2009 11:17:32 pm

Stoller isn't a "man of his word." He isn't a man at all. He's Rita.

Jean

10/30/2009 05:13:33 pm

Rita Haywood

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics