When a felon says of me that I am a bad lawyer, I know I hit the mark. This is the highest form of flattery a bum like that could give me.
There is nothing else that needs to be said.
Ms. Green also thinks you are a bad lawyer, Mr. Nathan. She's not a felon or a bum.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
When a felon says of me that I am a bad lawyer, I know I hit the mark. This is the highest form of flattery a bum like that could give me.
There is nothing else that needs to be said.
Attorney-client privilege forbids me from discussing the particulars of cases in public. This is the case even after a case is done. For that reason, I am not at liberty to discuss the matter of Cheri Green, a cabdriver who was up on charges that would potentially have led to the revocation of her c/l had she been found guilty.
You had referred Ms. Green to me for pro bono publico representation, and I did undertake to represent her at that kangaroo court at 400 W. Superior.
Without getting to specifics that would cause a breach of privilege that has not been waived by Ms. Green to my knowledge, it suffices to say that her chauffeur's license was NOT revoked.
If you reveal facts, foulks, that lead us to understand that Green has waived privilege, I am going to be in a position to respond fully to any stupidity you spread.
As of now, all I can say is that your report of Ms. Green's opinion is that it comes from the pen of a felon. No one takes the word of a felon seriously if he has any sense.
Felons have ZERO credibility.
Donald Nathan
See http://cptda.bravehost.com/hof.html
Although I am not at liberty to reveal confidences and secrets of Cheri Green, I am able to speak to what is public record. At the administrative hearing that took place at 400 W. Superior where the City tried to have her C/L revoked, she walked out of there with a small fine and her C/L in her hand. I am proud for that successful representation done at no charge to her.
Another lawyer would have charged her $100 or more for that hearing, and he would have had her come back for at least a seocnd hearing at another $100 charge for his time.
Felon foulks might have been unhappy with successful results. So too might Green have been unhappy. But at least she didn't lose her C/L. Those two are a couple of ingrates if ever there were.
Donald Nathan
Mr. Wiedersberg also thinks you are a bad lawyer, Mr. Nathan. He's not a felon or a bum.
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Although I am not at liberty to reveal confidences and secrets of Cheri Green, I am able to speak to what is public record. At the administrative hearing that took place at 400 W. Superior where the City tried to have her C/L revoked, she walked out of there with a small fine and her C/L in her hand. I am proud for that successful representation done at no charge to her.
Another lawyer would have charged her $100 or more for that hearing, and he would have had her come back for at least a seocnd hearing at another $100 charge for his time.
Felon foulks might have been unhappy with successful results. So too might Green have been unhappy. But at least she didn't lose her C/L. Those two are a couple of ingrates if ever there were.
Donald Nathan
Never having represented Steve Wiedersberg, he would have no basis to make a judgment as to the quality of my services as a lawyer other than on hearsay from sources like you, foulks. I'm not going to lose sleep over this kind of conclusion even if the man were to express it - which he has not.
Your expression of the opinions of others is so lacking in credibility as to be laughable.
In fact, you have no credibility about anything, you stinking felon. No one in his right mind takes you seriously in the taxi industry at this point.
Lets get this record straight:
1) Wolfgang Weiss is dumb. A guy that owns his own business that moonlights part time as a driver. His business has been open at least 10 years and is doing well. He lends a hand to us drivers free or charge. Wow, what a bad guy.
2) Nathan is a terrible attorney. Green faced loss of a Chauffeurs for what must have been a very serious charge. I would believe revocation isn't an option for the courts for a minor infraction. Wouldn't you agree Mike? Green left with her license in tact with a minimal fine. This must have been the result of Nathans presence in the court room. Fat Boy Alpern agreed to a plea bargain rather than get embarrassed by Nathan. Nathan told Green to take it for two reasons A) Green might have been her own worst enemy. Some people do not know how to testify. or B) The hearing officer might have been pro city in all matters. Nathan is a terrible attorney for helping Green FOR FREE AND GETTING HER LICENSE REINSTATED.
Sorry to say this Nathan, attorneys charge 200 an hour to defend people with license revocations at stake. Your only offense is working too cheaply.
3) Weidersberg says Nathan is a terrible attorney as well. Weidersberg never used Nathans services. How would he know? I collected 10k BI and 1.5k PD for a case Nathan handeled for me years ago. Never saw a court room or gave a statement to the other party. Collected in 8 months. Wouldn't someone that Nathan represented know a little more than Steve Wiesdersberg?
End result: the only offense Nathan and Wolfgang are guilty of are working for FREE TO HELP US. Same for Enger and UTCC.
Mike, was the fact that Nathan and Wolfgang know the correct details of your felony record the reason for your bashing of them? Anyone with common sense can see this. It's too bad you don't have any!
Your want of credibilty speaks for itself. Anyone reading your words with a head on his shoulders knows to take them in precisely the opposite sense.
For that reason, I thank you profoundly for your compliment. That you find me a bad lawyer is the highest form of flattery you could pay me.
All of Mikes posts here contain unfounded allegations. This is the kind of posts that are to be deleted by rule. Let's see what George does.
Note Bene: George gives them headline billing, of course. This is a rather unfortunate choice because it reflects badly on George's credibility to venerate the baseless opinions of a felon.
Subject:
Re: hey george, i thought you said you were gonna answer the questions?
Name: Big Fat Mouth
Date Posted: Aug 29, 08 - 8:49 PM
Message:
"George has these and also the questions I have posted ..."
"The claims Steve Kim has made are very serious."
"This isn't the behavior of a leader if true."
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Note Bene: George gives them headline billing, of course. This is a rather unfortunate choice because it reflects badly on George's credibility to venerate the baseless opinions of a felon.
