STOLLER'S PROCESS SERVERS ARE LOOKING FOR THE CHICAGO LAW FIRM OF GORDON AND REES, RYAN T. BROWN, CHANCE L. COOPER AND J. HAYES RYAN ESQ,

11/4/2009

20 Comments

You can run but you can't hide forever!

20 Comments

Proscess Server

11/3/2009 09:59:55 am

I'll get those guys...

Batman

11/3/2009 10:09:59 am

Stollerexposed.blog.com

The Joker

11/3/2009 10:15:25 am

I like Batman, without him there would be no "Joker"...

SOJOURNER

11/3/2009 08:28:06 pm

I forgot to ask. How's your brother doing in prison. I believe he's in an Arizona penitentary. They'll be coming to get you next.

8219 W Grand Avenue

11/3/2009 10:05:44 pm

http://www.rubloff.com/property/5747240

11/3/2009 11:04:16 pm

What ever happened to Stoller v. Thomas Gooch? Have not seen any updates on that case for awhile.

Scribe

11/3/2009 11:51:43 pm

It appears that Stoller's docket is so filled that even Superman can only handle some many crisis at one time, but I'm informed that several "legal" missiles are headed in that direction that have not hit. After all the readers are not always interested in what Stoller does, but readers always find more interesting is the "defendants" reaction from what does does according to a recent psychological study...but you would have to talk to Stoller to get his litigation stradgy...but since your also a "defendant" in a number of matters that would be impossible unless there was a "court" reporter present and you were under "oath"...there currently is an appeal in that case and for a time the matter has shifted to the Appeals court....

11/4/2009 12:05:16 am

I just looked up the docket sheet for the Cook County Circuit Court. The Stoller v. Gooch appeal was dismissed May 9, 2009. I assume that means that Stoller lost. I guess that is why there has not been an update on the Gooch case since the spring.

Also, when is Chili Palmer going to update Stollerexposed.com?

Scribe

11/4/2009 12:23:27 am

NR your fast, your good, but the appeal referred to envolves your man in Lake County not Cook County...there also are some very pleasant surprises coming as soon as Stoller can get out of the fox hole he's currently in, having to write 6 appeals within the next 30 days...if you stay tuned your man will be, like you, NR, a featured item at the Chicago Daley Center for at least the next 10 years, after all he has "earned" that super status, according to an unconfirmed report....it is also reported that at a recent indirect criminal trial your man was kind enough to request the judge to lock Stoller up for "six" months for the serious "crime" of publishing speech in the Internet. That decision is due Nov 12, 2009, everyone in the world is waiting to read it...

11/4/2009 12:32:45 am

Thanks for the update and good luck!

Stone

11/4/2009 12:45:10 am

According to an unconfirmed report any time you want to "talk" face to face, somebody would enjoy the pleasure of your company at Nanciea? You have the number....

Leo The Toadstool

11/4/2009 01:08:43 am

Stone/Leo, I'm sure the only people who would have anything to do with you are the men you serviced in prison.

11/4/2009 01:19:15 am

Arizona Man Charged With Trying to Scam South Kitsap Horse Owner

Kitsap Sun staff

BURLEY

A 60-year-old man from Glendale, Ariz., has been charged with a felony for allegedly passing a bad check following his involvement in what was described as a "scam" involving the sale of a horse.

Prosecutors say he tried to pull a scam on a horse owner from Burley in South Kitsap.

According to court documents, Christopher N. Stoller of Glendale responded to an ad in a national horse magazine in October and arranged to buy and transport the animal. Two days before the horse was to be shipped to Arizona, the Burley horse owner received a check via overnight mail for $6,447. The owner called the bank and learned that there was not enough money in the account to cover the check.

Stoller apparently convinced the owner that there was a mistake at the bank. He allegedly told her that since transportation was already arranged, he would sue her if she refused to release the horse, so she shipped the horse. The bank refused to honor the check because of insufficient funds.

Three weeks later, the owner received a letter from a man who identified himself as Stoller's brother. He said the horse was not the quality promised and demanded $8,500 for return of the horse. The letter said the Arizona residents wanted to be reimbursed for veterinary bills they incurred and they would destroy the horse if she did not respond. Later letters offered a settlement if she paid $2,500.

Kitsap County sheriff's deputies reviewed the case and contacted authorities in Arizona, who took custody of the horse.

Court papers filed in Kitsap County Superior Court do not mention whether the prosecutor intends to bring the suspect to Washington for prosecution.

Bubba link

11/4/2009 01:20:03 am

Leo will be singing a new tune very soon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnS2xixCMCU

Leo may also find this advice useful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tchs-2URIAs

Scribe

11/4/2009 01:43:35 am

It should also be noted for the record and the hungry sharks who appear to be your fans, should note that Stoller has a pending Cook County Law Division Case against the Coleman's the alleged owner of the Black Beauty horse in the above article, which information is missing from "Arizona Man Charged With Trying to Scam South Kitsap Horse Owner" and the Vet who examined the horse for providing a fraudulent health report on the Black Beauty horse and that the Owners of the horse are facing a multi million dollar lawsuit in cook County Illinois as a result of their alleged fraud on Christopher Stoller...now you know the "rest of the story" thank you NR for calling it to the attention of your fans, the "sharks" who come each day... to see "blood" in the water....and they find plenty to look at right here every day seven days a week... including holidays...for Litigation is War, Welcome to the Front!

Hondo

11/4/2009 05:07:05 am

Leo's smug attitude could very well lead to his downfall.

Anon

11/4/2009 02:05:26 pm

Stoller/Scribe, your comment betrays you as the lowest form of scum. Hopefully your involvement will land you in prison with your equally mentally deficient and ethically challenged brother.

Psyche Professor

11/5/2009 03:08:19 am

Anon is obviously from California were "pot" is readly available, because the "lowest form of scum" terminology is commonly used only by parties who have a strong proclivity to street drugs...

Anon

11/5/2009 11:15:45 am

Stoller, the commentators you impersonate have a common thread, even apart from their tenuous grasp of logic, their mangling of the English language and their delusional musings. They all feign being experts -- just like you. As far as your drug references go, the only evidence of impaired judgment that anyone can see is in your blog entries.

Hoddie

11/5/2009 03:43:10 pm

Anon please pass me the joint! Aaaaaa this stuff is melow...Hey everyone Anon is alright...good stuff...Aaaaaa!

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.

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.

RSS Feed

Americans for the Enforcement of Attorney Ethics