Novak Loses petswarehouse.com, Files For Bankruptcy
An anonymous reader writes "Remember Robert Novak, the person who has filed several frivolous lawsuits in order to silence people who criticize his business. Well, Robert Novak has lost his domain (see here)in a countersuit filed against him, and has just filed for bankruptcy ."
Do we see here proof that unethical corporate practices (sueing everyone) will eventually be the destruction of your business? I for one hope so.
From the link:
Novak 3 involves a lawsuit against Novak as the result of a defamatory message that was posted claiming a Bar Complaint was pending on November 2001 against John Benn. A judgment has been rendered against Novak in that case.
So he's going off suing people because they are (I assume rightfully) complaining about his poor business practices in a public forum. Then he publicly defamates a LAWYER'S character and loses the whole business!!! What an ultra maroon! It's big time poetic justice that Mr. Benn will get his $50,000 settlement from the obliteration of the brand.
If you don't have something nice to sig, then don't sig anything at all.
The dogcow says "Moof!"
I'm under the impression that this isn't the first time he files for bankruptcy. I'm also under the impression that he doesn't care about his business, and that he'll find a way to sue some more people next week
What I'd like to know is: does he manage to profit from it? I'm not very knowledgeable of bankruptcy law, but is there a way he could be trading money for a bad credit history, in a way? Because if he manages and cares to do it again and again, he's probably not losing everything every time. Or maybe he's just hoping he'll get lucky?
Karma: Could be worse (could be raining)
This is the kind of maddening garbage that makes people sound the trumpet for tort reform... and rightfully so.
I'd like to see some kind of penalty for filing frivolous/nuisance/totally-without-merit suits, preferably a monetary penalty (jail time might be going just a wee bit too far... though it would be very satisfying).
This should really go for all types of torts, including medical malpractice (disclaimer: I am a physician). I have multiple colleagues who have been sued, and NOT ONE of these suits had real merit, or were for any sort of egregious breach in the standard of care. How do I know? I've looked at the charts and thought "I wouldn't have done anything different." I could never testify against any of these physicians, because what they did was objectively medically reasonable. Now, they all won their cases, but some were very close... frighteningly close.
You always play the odds in medicine... and sometimes you lose. Every surgical procedure has a certain complication rate, no matter what you do. Every disease has a certain mortality rate, no matter what you do. The medical reality is that "sh*t happens," and it inevitably happens to a certain percentage of patients. It sucks to be in that small percentage, but attorneys and "hired gun" expert witnesses attempt to pin it on the doctor. The scariest thing of all is that you can lose everything you've ever worked for, just because "sh*t happens."
Tort reform is a good thing... trick is, you have to do it while not taking away the poor man's keys to the court room. Even so, if the poor man files a nonsense suit, he should find himself even poorer.
Seems fair to me...
Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.