Hey forum members and shelby enthusiasts. I really dont want to stir the pot anymore than it needs to be stirred, however, i saw this on TeamShelby's forum today and hadnt really heard anything of the sort from the SAAC crowd or even the TS crowd, things have been pretty quite lately. Im not playing favorites with this post, it is just news...i didnt write it so dont fire at me. As usual, lets try to keep the responses clean. http://www.teamshelby.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=29539&hl=saac Best Regards, Vern
Sorry, but it was really stupid to cross post it here, it is almost a month old. ..and it is non-news, attempted to be made more than it is by the TS propaganda machine...and you took the bait. SAAC filed the (counter)suit in Massachusetts to try and save expenses against the main suit filed by CSLI in California. This reports that the motion to dismiss the suit filed in Mass. was upheld. Now the single venue for the suit will remain in California. No more, no less.
Ya know, i dont really fully understand most aspects about the legal community. That is why i posted the link without making comment. I didnt take any "bait", i simply posted exactly what i saw. However, in all seriousness, explain to me how it is not a big deal that SAAC is now merely a defendant in the lawsuit. Wouldnt the suit in MA have made them the prosecution? Isnt that kind of a big deal for SAAC to no longer have a case against shelby directly? This means that Saac can only break even in the current lawsuit right? Furthermore, im not a "stupid" kid and i dont think it was "stupid" to post something that has seemed to be overlooked by everyone in the shelby community, month old or not. There are no replys to this post on teamshelby and i havent heard any news of this on saacforums.com or this forum here. Its news to me and pretty much everyone else who isnt directly involved in the lawsuit, i think. Best Regards, Vern
I thought that forum participation was encouraged. However, when someone's post is referred to as "stupid" just because he would like some input or clarification is pretty damn discouraging. I was taught to speak up and participate as it is part the learning process. I guess things are different here and I had better go back and read the rule book.
No, things arent different here and i appreciate your comments. Participation, as long as it is clean and constructive is highly encouraged on this forum for enthusiasts of all levels. Best Regards, Vern
Vern, This news and that particular post was actually discussed at SAACforum. It seems to be a rather misleading interpretation of the facts. http://saacforum.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=279604019e6d3614aca94ca7becc82ec&topic=1746.0 Like you, I'm not trying to stir the pot, but you asked, so here it is. Josh
I have to agree Ron, the "stupid" comment is out of line. Not everybody reads all forums and all posts.
Its no big deal guys, Ron is a passionate person. The "stupid" comment, although at first offensive, i think was taken as more than it is. There are some posters out there that simply post to start contraversy or elicit a reaction out of someone, it was not my intention to behave as such although i think that is what Ron saw in my post. We are all enthusiasts here and being 'enthusiastic' is what these forums, especially this one, are all about. I try to read most everything over at saacforum, i simply must have missed this thread. My bad....no harm...no foul. NOW BACK TO THE CARS....WHATAU SAY BOYS Best Regards, Vern
Ron, actually that is not true. SAAC filed their own suit against Carroll and CSL in Mass 1day before Shelby filed their own suit in California. Two different filings. These were always 2 different suits. The Mass suit filed by SAAC is now dismissed and the suit filed by Shelby Licensing and Carroll in California against SAAC is going ahead. On your site as well as ours are a copy of all filings and the dates they were filed. I usually don't respond to these, but the fact that you continue to portray yourselve as being attacked when you filed suit and separately is an untruth. I have a copy of a post on SAACforum.com where an admin clearly says " look who filed first, it was us" , like this was a contest. Well if it was, you won, because SAAC filed a suit first, not a counter in MASS, they did however file a counter in CA to move it all to MASS, that was denied as well. Both sides had intentions of filings, both sides feel wronged. Amy SHELBY AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE CLUB,INC. By Its Attorneys, PARTRIDGE SNOW & HAHN u-p DATED: January 28 ,2008 Shelby filed in Los Angeles on January 29th
