Section 230 of Title 47 of the US Code, a MUST read.

What is this “Section 230” thing anyway?

Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC § 230). It was passed as part of the much-maligned Communication Decency Act of 1996. Many aspects of the CDA were unconstitutional restrictions of freedom of speech (and, with EFF’s help, struck down by the Supreme Court), but this section survived and has been a valuable defense for Internet intermediaries ever since.

What protection does Section 230 provide?

Section 230 says that “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” This federal law preempts any state laws to the contrary: “[n]o cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.” The courts have repeatedly rejected attempts to limit the reach of Section 230 to “traditional” Internet service providers, instead treating many diverse entities as “interactive computer service providers.”

To read the full article please click on the link below

https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230

Defendants appear to fight back in regards to the Lawsuit

I think we all waited to see how the defendants in this matter would react over time and now it seems they have moved forward to ask for help and are going to fight back.

A recent Facebook page had been added called ” For Them We Speak” along with a plea asking for donations to help them with their current legal bills.

It seems the current legal bill is over $10,000.00 and another $8,000.00 is needed just to defend this group of 5. Not knowing the legal system itself, one has to wonder why is this case still in the court system and racking up bills from what I would say for both sides? It does stop you in your tracks and make you reflect  on why this suit was initial filed doesn’t it? Is this a game of chicken we see playing out before our eyes ? Or is this a lawyers paradise of an endless billing process?  ( click on picture for larger view)

http://www.facebook.com/ForThemWeSpeak

http://wdofmichiganlawsuit112cv00074.chipin.com/mypages/view/id/2d08d49ff9c2aba0

Is using an unlicensed business name to take in donations fraud?

Is it legal or ethical to run under a business name and ask for public donations when you are not who you say you are or licensed under that name? Per the IRS guidelines the answer to that answer would be a big “NO”.  Maybe this is why there is so much outrage between so many in Facebook Animal Rescue. This example goes back to the Michigan Federal Court Case where the plaintiff Penelope Ashenhurt ( you see here) is tweeting for donations from the general public and uses the name CCAC Rescue Team. Penelope Ashenhurst lives in Tonypandy UK and the CCAC Shelter we keep hearing about is in Whiteville, North Carolina, this alone brings questions to my mind on why someone in the UK is asking for donations for a State Bound Animal Shelter.

I also called Columbus County Animal Control Shelter in Whiteville, NC and asked the staff there if Penelope Ashenhurst from the UK was an authorized employee of the shelter, the answer was NO. I then asked if she was indeed CCAC Rescue Team and the answer I received was, Ma’am I don’t know who she is or what she is doing but I get calls about her all the time and I know people give her a lot of money. Other than that I don’t know what to tell you, all these woman run on FaceBook and drive me crazy.

So Penelope Ashenhurst is indeed not CCAC Rescue Team legally, it’s just a business name that she gave herself to use. So what comes of all the money she has collected thru these Chip In’s, Tweets, Powabunga and more? That’s the unanswered question at the moment. Are these funds reported to the IRS or to any State within the US and if so under what name as still today I can not find a CCAC Rescue Team registered in 28 US States.

Maybe it’s time for people to verify if an Animal Rescue Group, Team or Organization is legally registered prior to hitting the send button with Paypal. After all you do want your funds going to the animal in the picture that caught your attention in the first place don’t you?

Lesson here, Buyer Beware.

Here’s What the Civil Justice System does with Frivolous Lawsuits

Attorney (877) 377-7848

Posted by Mark BelloAugust 31, 2011 12:31 PM

One of the catch phrases of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and tort reform groups is “frivolous lawsuits” – a lawsuit that has no legal basis, or is so petty, that suit isn’t justified. Unfortunately, more often than not, these pro-business, billion dollar corporate lobbying groups are claiming “lawsuit abuse” when they know the cases they seek to place restriction upon are anything but frivolous. Common sense will tell you, for example, that a “frivolous case” does not need a damages cap.

Today, I read about a case that illustrates what the system does with truly “frivolous” cases; I thought I would share it with you so that, hopefully, you can see the difference between what the tort reform groups are trying to regulate and a real “frivolous” case. The case I refer to involves an Illinois woman who was sued by her two adult children. The children alleged she was a “bad” mom. Their parents were divorced and the children lived with their dad in a $1.5 million home. They claimed their mother failed to send money inside their birthday cards, called her daughter home early from homecoming, and threatened to call the police on her son, then 7, if he didn’t buckle up in the car. The children sought $50,000 for emotional distress. The children’s lawyer was the woman’s ex-husband, the children’s father. The case was dismissed by a circuit court; the kids appealed. Last week, an Illinois appellate court ruled that the Circuit Court was correct in dismissing the case.

If the Chamber decided to lambast the filing of this case, I would agree with them. However, the Chamber would go too far in its criticism; the pro-business, anti-justice organizations would lie and say that a case like this is why the system needs to be reform and why we need damages caps and limited access to the civil justice system. But, let’s look at how the civil justice system handled this “frivolous” case.

The civil justice system has mechanisms in place to prevent and dismiss “frivolous” lawsuits, and mechanisms to punish those who bring them. The circuit court judge, who first heard the case, dismissed it without much consideration. The appeals court panel that reviewed the dismissal upheld that dismissal. Still to be determined is whether the plaintiff will be forced to pay court costs and attorney fees, a “frivolous” filing penalty that judges have discretion to assess.

The typical frivolous case ends with serious consequences to the lawyer and the plaintiff who brought it; the plaintiff who files suit, most often, loses and is assessed costs. The system built in these checks and balances so courts and juries will not waste time on meritless cases. Anyone can file a lawsuit, but the real question is whether the litigation has enough merit to sustain itself. If it doesn’t, as in this case, it will be dismissed and it will never see an impaneled jury. So, ask yourself why tort reform lobbying groups are seeking damages caps to combat “frivolous lawsuits”. Obviously, it is because they don’t want to tell you the truth. The truth? These pro-business lobbyists and public relations manipulators want to place damages caps on serious lawsuits, those with serious consequences, the ones that actually impact the profits of billion dollar corporations. The use of the buzz word “frivolous” is a smoke screen. They are masters at manipulating the truth to their greedy end.

So, now you know. The civil justice system already has checks and balances to eliminate “frivolous” cases. There is no need for “tort reform” to root them out. I blog, frequently, about this issue because I can’t stand the injustice of it. I can’t stand to see politicians, who I used to respect, taking campaign money from these billion dollar organizations knowing that the premise of tort reform is based upon lies and deceit, then introducing or voting for legislation that seriously hurts innocent citizens. Afterwards, these despicable politicians brag about their bills or their votes; they campaign on them, as if they actually accomplished something “good” for America. I can’t stand that they think it is “good” to beat up on the weak and powerless. I can’t stand to see seriously injured or disabled people left to fend for themselves because billion dollar corporations responsible for their injuries have bought off state or federal politicians. I can’t stand it because I know, first hand, that tort reform does nothing to curb “abuse” or “frivolity”; reform only restricts access and damages in serious cases with serious issues and serious injuries to real victims. I just can’t stand it!

Mark Bello has thirty-three years experience as a trial lawyer and twelve years as an underwriter and situational analyst in the lawsuit funding industry. He is the owner and founder of Lawsuit Financial Corporation which helps provide legal finance cash flow solutions and consulting when necessities of life litigation funding is needed by plaintiffs involved in pending, personal injury litigation. Bello is a Justice Pac member of the American Association for Justice, Sustaining and Justice Pac member of the Michigan Association for Justice, Business Associate of the Florida, Tennessee, and Colorado Associations for Justice, a member of the American Bar Association as well as their ABA Advisory Committee, the State Bar of Michigan and the Injury Board.

CCAC Rescue Team, Foster’s Home Raided by local North Carolina Authorities

I don’t see Pet-Abuse.Com being listed in the Michigan Federal Court Case as a defendant however there are references about this issue listed as a common allegation in the Lawsuit.

Now why is it this group picked these 5 Defendants out of all of the hundreds of people calling them out via FaceBook, TV News Station, Newspaper Articles and .com sites? For those of us following along this is starting to look like nothing more than a personal attack from these Plaintiffs versus any real facts for such a lawsuit.  ( click picture for a larger view) To read the entire listing on Pet-Abuse.Com see below:

http://www.pet-abuse.com/cases/18304/NC/US/

Also see previous post showing the connection between CCAC Rescue Team and Cathy Campbell. A Chip In for her legal fee’s are posted and screen shots of the Pookie Page that was created via FaceBook.

The Barclay Foundation needing help with Parvo puppies

The Barclay Foundation found themselves not only being lied to by Seven Star Sanctuary and Rescue employee’s about these non-existent health certificates, but now a huge Vet bill and to make it worse the CCAC Rescue Team took out their anger with TBF for publically telling the truth on the situation at hand and reported their Facebook posts and reported them to the State of Iowa Department of Agriculture in  which TBF License to operate was temporally suspended pending a full investigation.

We are starting to see a pattern emerge with this mean-spirited behavior from this same group women time and time again. If you don’t do as they tell you they go into attack mode and run a negative campaign on you in hopes to force you to shut up and not speak out on their reckless behavior.

So now this same group of 3 women have filed a Federal Lawsuit in Michigan on 3 North Carolina Residents, 1 in Pennsylvania and 1 in South Carolina. Another attempted attack to shut down anyone who speaks out about their bad behavior.  I do know that this case is being watched by many and let me warn everyone this is a case for trying to squash your Freedom of Speech.  How can any of us allow this type of behavior to take place in our court system? When you create issues such as what took place here, people are allowed to come out and voice their thoughts on the matter. It’s your right to have your views and to speak out when you see an injustice and not be in fear of being sued. I do find it odd of all the hundreds of screen shots that I am being sent, so far to date only 2 have been against that Defendants and I wont post them as they are not even relevant to this Columbus County Animal Shelter issue.  Please send any evidence on either side to alegalknot@gmail.com .

( click on picture for larger view)

The Barclay Foundation, we were lied to.

Iowa based The Barclay Foundation not happy that they were lied to by the CCAC Rescue Team of Melissa Impens, Mary J Thomas and Penelope Ashenhurst and Seven Star Sanctuary and Rescue.

It seems they were under attack from the Plaintiffs in this Michigan lawsuit when TBF came out exposing that all these animals had been transported by this team very sick with parvo and not one health certificate.

Case in point that this Team does not follow the current State, Federal and USDA APHIS laws in the Animal Rescue arena.

( click on picture for large view)

For a better view of this incident you can read about it here:

http://www.examiner.com/article/friends-of-animals-warn-rescuers-to-take-proper-precautions-for-disease-control