 | | judge judy to bad this wasnt on judge judy | |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 |  Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal
Looks less like a site to help you win in court than it does as a sales pitch for a poker chip customizer kit.
A better strategy - force AT&T to go to arbitration. You have a better chance there(no matter how small) than you do in winning against AT&T when they appeal a small claims court loss.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/
| |
|
 |  ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4 | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal Force them into arbitration? Are you crazy? | |
|
|  cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7 | said by Linklist:Looks less like a site to help you win in court than it does as a sales pitch for a poker chip customizer kit. Good grief. He has two banners, one of which isn't all that big at the top. And they are from a friend's business that get gets a cut of each sale to help with his defense fund (or at least so he says). So he's not a web designer creating a fancy webpage. At least it loads fast so you don't go over your wireless cap. | |
|
| kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL | Let them appeal and spend a dollar to defend a nickel. Which is likely somewhere near a lifetime of revenue of an average customer.
--
Jeff Howe
Jeff's Blog - »www.ostjournal.net | |
|
| | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal AT&T is paying its legal team anyway, might as well employ the lawyers to establish a precedent. | |
|
| | |  vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal There's no precedent, an appeal would usually be a trial de novo in front of a low-level trial court (in MA, the state district court), not an actual appeals court that issues precedent-setting opinions. | |
|
| | | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal Yes, and with a new judge, new court, and new defense, the opportunity to establish a ruling in AT&T's favor increases. What other reason is there for AT&T to appeal a $850 judgement? | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal Most states do not easily grant appeals for small claims court. I believe California is one of maybe 3 (?) states that guarantees an appeal.
In fact California's defacto appeal means the new trial will likely proceed just like the last one as ATT was not required to show any error in order to get the new trial. | |
|
| | | | | | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal I know MA gives the losing party appeal-by-right. | |
|
| | | | | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | That doesn't answer my question regarding AT&T's motivation to appeal a $850 judgement if it isn't to change the ruling and start putting a lid of other potential litigation. | |
|
| | | | | | | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal The motivation is they have a chance to save $850. They'll prevail on appeal in some cases, and lose on others, so overall they will pay less than if they just let the original judgements stand. Unless is goes up to a higher court (at that court's discretion), we're not going to see binding precedent. | |
|
| | | | | | | |  XiodenPremium
join:2008-06-10
Monticello, NY
kudos:1 | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal They'll be pushing the binding arbitration clause in the contracts to get it thrown out of court during the appeals.
After that they just have to cite that one verdict to anyone else who tries in small claims court and they save themselves a lot of money, and get to keep the "unlimited" cash cow going strong. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal The contract specifically allows suits in small claims court. | |
|
| | | | | | | | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | Yeah more like the lawyers making the appeal are motivated to take a break from sending cease-and-desist letters to people downloading TV shows, and get some extra money for going to court for AT&T. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | said by openbox9:That doesn't answer my question regarding AT&T's motivation to appeal a $850 judgement if it isn't to change the ruling and start putting a lid of other potential litigation.
Its not overly obvious? Its to make collecting money from a judgement as long and tiresome as possible.
Luckily my state doesn't grant defacto appeals so its not an issue. Small Claims court is fast and easy here as well. | |
|
| | | | | | | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal It is obvious and that's kind of my point  | |
|
| | | | | | | | | Never underestimate the court of public opinion. | |
|
| | | | They need to appeal (from a business perspective - not that I support AT&T) because if they don't, they leave themselves open to the same deal (or a class action suit) from everyone that has the "unlimited" package. I.e., it's not just a nickel (or $850), but $850 * 10's if not 100's of thousands....so appealing against a possible (probable?) future cost of millions makes sense. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Shows small claims court info; not deal with AT&T appeal They don't "need" to appeal, they need to stop being a shitty company. | |
|
| vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | said by Linklist:A better strategy - force AT&T to go to arbitration. You have a better chance there(no matter how small) than you do in winning against AT&T when they appeal a small claims court loss.
That's terrible advice and the only people who would give it are you and AT&T. His "appeal" (actually a new trial) would consist of presenting the same evidence he already presented and won once with. | |
|
| tcopePremium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2 | You do understand that this is AT&T as the defendent, right? As if AT&T has ever made anything easy.
None the less, a settlement won't really do much for anyone but putting a few hundred dollars in the plaintiff's pocket. I don't get the impression he cares too much about the money. Only a verdict and a judges ruling would send any type of message or change anything. | |
|
| | Appeal? For some reason I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that small claims decisions were not subject to appeal.
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. | |
|
|  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD |  Re: Appeal?
said by pende_tim:For some reason I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that small claims decisions were not subject to appeal. In California it is not only subject to appeal but the "appeal" is a new trial outright, albeit with lawyers this time around.
»courts.ca.gov/1072.htm
Seems kinda dumb to me, I always thought appeals courts should be in the business of deciding whether or not the lower courts followed proper process and nothing more.
My guess is that the original plaintiff in this case will try to argue that AT&T is appealing simply to encourage him to abandon the case (the section entitled "The Judge's Decision")
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
|
| | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: Appeal? said by pnh102:said by pende_tim:For some reason I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that small claims decisions were not subject to appeal. In California it is not only subject to appeal but the "appeal" is a new trial outright, albeit with lawyers this time around. Which means the "winner" will have to shell out big bucks for his new counsel, unless he's lucky enough as a cause celebre to attract an ambulance-chasing populist to take the case.
Be careful what you wish for. | |
|
| | |  fatnesssubtleJanitor
join:2000-11-17
fishing
kudos:14
Bright House Netwo..
TekSavvy
Forum Feature Requ..
Need Site Help
Rants, Raves, and ..
| Re: Appeal? said by elray:said by pnh102:said by pende_tim:For some reason I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that small claims decisions were not subject to appeal. In California it is not only subject to appeal but the "appeal" is a new trial outright, albeit with lawyers this time around. Which means the "winner" will have to shell out big bucks for his new counsel, unless he's lucky enough as a cause celebre to attract an ambulance-chasing populist to take the case. Be careful what you wish for. AT&T dropped their appeal and paid the judgment.
»www.theverge.com/2012/3/17/28793···0-payout
quote:
AT&T's back-and-forth with Matt Spaccarelli, the customer that took the carrier to small claims court for its throttling practices on unlimited data plans, appears to be over. AP reports that the carrier sent Spaccarelli a check for $850 — along with $85 for court fees — in compliance with the court ruling in February.
--
don’t let haters get me off my grind | |
|
| | | | | | Re: Appeal? Why is this not on the front page news? | |
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Appeal? Thank you. I saw it. | |
|
| |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Seems like it makes small claims court effectively useless.
That's the way these companies like it. No justice, you have to accept their terms under all circumstances (binding arbitration, etc)
and you have no legal recourse.
Meanwhile they have every recourse versus you and can do whatever they damn well please.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | | said by pende_tim:For some reason I was under the (apparently mistaken) impression that small claims decisions were not subject to appeal.
California and I think 2 other states will grant an appeal for any reason.
I believe most states you must show an obvious error in order to even be considered for appeal. Even then its not usually granted. | |
|
| | | Must depend on the state. Here in AZ they told me there was no appeal. | |
|
BiggA
join:2005-11-23
EARTH | AT&T will win appeal Because the customer is wrong. He signed the contract that is crystal clear, and allow AT&T to throttle the service when they believe that his use is impacting their network. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
Oxygen69Premium
join:2008-12-08
Madison, WI | Any "Resonable Man"/person argument. Personally, I think people could get VERY far legally with AT&T by using the "Reasonable Man" argument/assumption in contract law.
-How any reasonable man or person would read their contract and would view what the company is going to do, when they use the wording "Unlimited" is how the decision would be made.
I think any reasonable person would read "unlimited" as NOT being limited in any way! By those definitions and the fact that it is small claims, the plaintiff (guy winning $850) is not bound to show or know, absolute precedent to win the case. That is why small claims courts are not Precedent setting. (legally speaking) As long as he has a "reasonable argument" anyone can win in small claims court unless the defendant can actually bring precedent to overrule certain arguments.. Even so, small claims, tends to make the legal system less intimidating for the "Layman. And side with the smaller party (manytimes). | |
|
|
|  AVDRespice, Adspice, ProspicePremium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1 | Re: Challenging A Company's Contract Violations so, the case was precident setting after all. | |
|
| | Virgin Mobile & Cricket Too? Can I use the same procedure to sue Virgin Mobile & Cricket for ripping me off too? I still have worthless USB dongles from those idiots that I can't use for anything cause their internet service is too slow to even open a website! | |
|
 wings10I Am LegendPremium
join:2004-06-09
South Elgin, IL | AT&T ad banner LOL I love the AT&T ad banner on the top of his web page. LOL | |
|
| | They learned everything from Bell Canada I swear AT&T learned every underhanded trick from Bell Canada. The difference being in America you can sue the isp whereas in Canada things are so blatantly skewed towards the big incumbents everyone in Canada simply gave up. | |
|
|
|
·