Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 16th 09, 12:46 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,132
Default An Interesting Development

Ms. Polgar testified under oath at her deposition (pages 645-648) that
she lost a deal with a Dallas based company, Deliberate Literate, due to
the alleged defamation the defendants subjected her to. She testified
that the deal was multi-year for a total of $139,000 to be paid to her
by Deliberate. She testified that she believed that the person at
Deliberate Literate would confirm that they had a deal at $139,000 or
whatever the amount was.

Well, today Ms. Polgar brought this person in to Lubbock to be deposed.
I am told that the person testified under oath that there was never a
contract or agreement between Deliberate Literate and Ms. Polgar to pay
her any money. There is more which I will share once the deposition
transcript is available.

It seems rather bizarre that her attorneys would bring this person in to
be deposed and give destructive testimony a variance with Polgar's sworn
testimony.

One has to wonder about her counsel's exercise of due diligence before
commencing litigation asserting claims against multiple defendants. If
Polgar and Truong have any sense left between them, they will find a way
to settle before the cases fully implode on them and their counsel.
Let's hope someone has an epiphany by Monday.
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 16th 09, 01:00 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default An Interesting Development

On Sep 15, 7:46*pm, MrVidmar wrote:


It seems rather bizarre that her Polar attorneys would bring this
person in to
be deposed and give destructive testimony a variance with Polgar's
sworn
testimony. --BL

Why is this bizarre? It is consistent with everthing about her.

Her opinions of anyone that DARE'S to question her analysis. How could
they? She knows everything. (In her humble opinion.)
  #3   Report Post  
Old September 16th 09, 02:40 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 319
Default An Interesting Development

On Sep 15, 4:46*pm, MrVidmar wrote:
Ms. Polgar testified under oath at her deposition (pages 645-648) that
she lost a deal with a Dallas based company, Deliberate Literate, due to
the alleged defamation the defendants subjected her to. She testified
that the deal was multi-year for a total of $139,000 to be paid to her
by Deliberate. She testified that she believed that the person at
Deliberate Literate would confirm that they had a deal at $139,000 or
whatever the amount was.

Well, today Ms. Polgar brought this person in to Lubbock to be deposed.
I am told that the person testified under oath that there was never a
contract or agreement between Deliberate Literate and Ms. Polgar to pay
her any money. There is more which I will share once the deposition
transcript is available.

It seems rather bizarre that her attorneys would bring this person in to
be deposed and give destructive testimony a variance with Polgar's sworn
testimony.

One has to wonder about her counsel's exercise of due diligence before
commencing litigation asserting claims against multiple defendants. If
Polgar and Truong have any sense left between them, they will find a way
to settle before the cases fully implode on them and their counsel.
Let's hope someone has an epiphany by Monday.


I'm curious: Did anyone know about this potential agreement? In
California, at least, knowledge of the relationship by the defendant
is a requirement for "interference with economic advantage." Does
Texas law differ? If they backed out of a deal just because people
said mean things about Polgar, she might argue libel, but that's quite
another story. (Truth, opinion, Sullivan, etc.)
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
An Interesting Development MrVidmar rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 2 September 16th 09 02:40 AM
An Interesting Development MrVidmar rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 2 September 16th 09 02:40 AM
Most interesting game by Zebediah. Sanny rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 5 June 4th 08 09:04 AM
Most interesting game by Zebediah. Sanny rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 2 June 4th 08 06:13 AM
Most interesting game by Zebediah. Sanny rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 2 June 4th 08 06:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017