Re: Court visit?
- From: "Ken" <knobrot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2006 00:33:59 +0100
"Just Another Bunty Fan" <Bunty@TO WINN DOT COM , DEFENDANTS TO ENJOY THERE
SLOPPING OUT TIME.COM> wrote in message
news:LyWgg.322655$xt.601@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Ken" <knobrot@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:44843468@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wonder if baldrick has bothered to go down to the court today?its moor like * CAUGHT * imho :)))))))))))))))))))))))))
Seems strange that he doesnt seem to have much of clue about whats been
going on, and doesnt even have copies of the 2 court orders which could
spell the end of the line for his ridiculous
nonsense.........................
k
IT IS ORDERED that:
1.
Unless by 16thDecember 2005 the Claimant serves on each Defendant against
which
he wants to proceed amended particulars of claim. The claims as presently
set out in
'59' and '84' be struck out. Such amended particulars of claim shall include
the
following particulars:
(i) The defamatory words complained of. (If necessary, by annexing the words
complained of, with the actual words underline.)
(ii) In the case of each and every publication complained of:
The above is the first paragraph of what baldrick asserts is a "letter" that
was sent to him by Justice Gray!
Personally its not the sort of letter I would want to receive
myself................lol
k
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Court visit?
- From: Pie Mash & Liquor
- Re: Court visit?
- References:
- Court visit?
- From: Ken
- Re: Court visit?
- From: Just Another Bunty Fan
- Court visit?
- Prev by Date: Re: :))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
- Next by Date: Re: NUDGE NUDGE ;-) ;-)))))) I GUESS THE PAPER WORK ARRIVED :)))
- Previous by thread: Re: Court visit?
- Next by thread: Re: Court visit?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
