Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
- From: "Just Looking" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 20:06:33 -0500
Paraphrasing a movie quote here. You can't blame a lawyer for being a lawyer
any more than you can blame a dog for being a dog.
Jim you might be missing the point here. Mr. Sablemann gets paid, like all
vermin lawyers like him do I suspect, by billing by the hour. So when he
files a motion against you that is only one part of the bill he gets to
create. With every motion he gets to send another bill explaining to the
customer what he did (or didn't do) in the motion he filed. Then he gets to
bill for their return phone calls about future strategy etc. Believe me this
whole thing (as difficult as it may be for you to accept) has absolutely
nothing to do with you. It is simply the more he can file, the more money he
gets. There is no way you could make him feel anything good or bad about
himself as a lawyer or human being. That might be like trying to make
Hermann Goering feel bad about signing the orders to wipe out the Jews.
Practicing law is simply something he does, and feels he does well, and get
paid to do it. It is just a money thing. Nothing more. If you want to bug
him get see that he doesn't win and doesn't get paid. The first will annoy
him and the later will kill him.
Calling him a waste of human life is merely stating the obvious, and
encouraging him to chase ambulances would be an otherwise undeserved step up
the career ladder.
It is obvious that he views you as an under educated, low paid unskilled
tradesman of sorts that is barely worth his attention. If it wasn't for
Brinks paying the freight he would have little to do with you. This is
nothing he would take on as a cause for himself, as his overblown legal
advocacy seems to suggest. Until Brinks give up, using this forum for
taunting or revenge might be an activity you want to save for another day.
What you say here can only hurt you there.
"Jim Rojas" <jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
Your reply to my motion just proves my point on how pathetic Brink's
position really is...you can quote me on this if you like. You Mr
Sablemann are a waste of human life. You would probably do better
chasing ambulances. Your client is a huge eye sore in the alarm
industry. Your client should just stick to transporting money. Your
client has no idea what real security means. 3 doors and a motion
detector for $99 is not security, it is a false sense of one.
I laugh at you.
Crash Gordon wrote:
be careful what you say here
"George Siegle" <gsiegle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
|I have printed the Documents, Thank You.
| When I show them on sales calls to people who have gotten a quote or
| to Brinks it put an end to them wanted to deal with Brinks.
| End users do not like the idea of having an alarm in their home that
| sell the home it has no value to the resell of the home if it is not
| the home and can not be used by the new owner unless they sign a
small| with Brinks.
| Thanks Brinks for the help, and good luck Jim.
| George Siegle
| "Jim Rojas" <jrojas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > Multi billion dollar corporation feels financially threatened by a
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-txndce/case_no-3:2007cv00437/case_id-165443/| > online alarm business located in Tampa, Florida.
| > Read all about it.
| > The court documents are all available for public viewing:
| > http://www.tech-man.com/brinks.asp
| > Jim Rojas
- Prev by Date: Re: Brinks Home Security Complaints
- Next by Date: Re: Recommendation on replacement for MA1016e panel
- Previous by thread: Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas
- Next by thread: Re: Brinks Home Security v Jim Rojas