First: Kill All The Lawyers

http://www.roadracingworld.com/news/cmra-locked-in-bitter-legal-dispute-with-racer-it-banned/

 

His bike is butt-ugly.

 

Don't judge a book by its cover, Inge is a very good rider and a real easy going guy.

 

This is an important reminder for groups like this to have a process (and follow the process) that makes sure everything is above board and protects themselves from being accused of things like this.
It doesn't matter how honest the people are if they can't prove it.

 

Hey Mongo...THIS is how you kill roadracing.

 

Not to mention it looks like the shit has been beat out of it.

 

Crazy story!

 

You want him to sue his wife?

 

May be. But the billboard above his head now reads here is a guy that got butthurt over a disagreement and instead of letting it go, now he is going to waste people's time and money. Cause let's be honest.. The only real damage here is to his ego. The cost will be passed down the the racers.

 

I have no dog in this fight. I don't know the plantiff. But who is to say that his allegations don't have some merit?

 

How does CMRA misappropriating funds hurt him? Sure it's illegal but how does suing them fill a void that makes him whole? Other than them being found guilty and him being able to say shame on you.

 

What does Inge "win" if the case goes in his favor? Obviously it would be very damaging to the CMRA.

(Yeah, what Hyper said)

Although, if Inge is correct CMRA should be held accountable. Whether it needs to be at this level or not I don't know.

 

Exactly.. its damaging. But what makes him whole?

 

Pringles and potato salad.

 

Mayo or mustard based. And I love me some sour cream and onion pringles

 

I've seen in various organizations that cliques can develop. On a board of directors this could be a problem. A board should have new members that bring new/fresh ideas every so often. Outting CMRA and being damaging possibly is not a bad idea, if that is the case. Someone in this thread has mentioned that the plantiff is an "easy going" guy. Maybe he was trying to offer new insight to the the board or pissed the wrong clique member off.

I don't know. But I do know that some people like to hold onto positions longer then they need.

 

That's a bit like asking why people argue on the internet. To prove they're right!

 

Not if he has a pet seagull.

 

I read some of the court documents sometime back. There was some delicious stuff in there.

 

Cliques? Like Scott Hall and Kevin Nash?