Discussion in 'General' started by CRRC93, May 13, 2018.
Relevant portion to the lawsuits
Irrelevant portion you're trying to cite
Why it's irrelevant
So if someone wants to see the books, just kick 'em out?
The beeb needs a shit-stir emoji.
Kinda weird there's not one...
If I remember correctly that was one of peytons arguments, he threatened to sue to see the books and the board kicked him before he filed the paperwork. The argument before the court was that he was removed from the club incorrectly, which he was according to the clubs bylaws. Not sure what defense the CMRA lawyers had for that but the CMRA won that argument, enter Harding who was a current member when the papers were files. Regardless of his standing and participation in the club if the CMRA kicked him out that would most certainly look bad on the CMRA as it would seem they simply kick out anyone that trys to see the books.
There is an important distinction here; Harding WAS NOT kicked out of the club, rather he was not RENEWED along with a few others. I don't personally have an issue with this as it's hard enough running the organization with an all volunteer management team which turns over several members each year. Members who sue other members, the club, the BOD etc. really shouldn't be welcome. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single organization of any type that wouldn't do the same.
So a member gets excommunicated for exercising one of the perks of membership.
Kicking out/not renewing membership because the member wants the by laws followed. Yeah, sounds like and organization I want to be a part of
Edit: The egg is fast. What he said.
Actually...for bringing litigation. Pick an organization you belong to and try it yourself. I would suggest your church or the YMCA. Hell, try WERA or your spouse...weird you guys continue to believe the "colluded with Russia" theory. Now you're suggesting that two federal judges and a state judge don't know what they're doing.
And now we're back to the circular argument you seem to avoid. Why was the lawsuit filed in the first place?
"Hey, Member-In-Good-Standing, you have the right to view the financials of the corporation in accordance with Texas law"
"Ok, show me the books."
"So you're going to make me file suit to see what you're legally obligated to show me?"
"Dear Member-In-Good-Standing, your membership will terminate at the annual renewal."
Is that about right?
No circular argument to it; the intent was to bankrupt the club (chapter 7 style) so that a new organization could be started. The original plaintiff told a member, a supporter of the original plaintiff told me the same thing.
Actually...not close at all.
So CMRA did show the books and this is all a sham?
At what point in time were the books shown to the plaintiffs?
Anxiously awaiting your corrections...
I'm pretty sure the evidence of collusion with Russia is in the CMRA books someone might want to check that out.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
“Objection Your Honor, that testimony constitutes hearsay!”
(sorry, just couldn't resist )
Yeah, I can only speak for myself; not having the opportunity to go on record personally sucks, but that only serves my self satisfaction and not the bigger picture.
Sounds like a perfect high level view to me.
Since the Inge lawsuit the club has changed it's stance on their books and records, the problem is that the club will only provide records back three years, which completely satisfies my involvement with the whole lawsuit going forward. However, the years in question are more than 3 years past so those records are off limits which is why I maintain interest in the whole thing.
WERA is not a member owned organization. And I hope that my wife, being a cooperative member of our family organization, would let me look at her checkbook without threat of litigation.
Separate names with a comma.