|
|
|
| Authored by: dobbo on Friday, October 05 2012 @ 09:52 AM EDT |
I don't remember BS&F telling different things to two courts
simultaneously. To my simplistic, logic brain that would be
a dumb thing to do, I would expect that would come back to
haunt me in an appeal if I won either case.
When did BS&F advise SCO to go bankrupt? If SCO wished to
continue against all logic and advice what paths are open to
BS&F? That is the fundamental question that I am trying to
get answered here? When a law firm takes a case how (if at
all) can they dump it when things go south?
I thought it was people affiliated with SCO that were the
cause of the horrible attacks against you. I'm not saying
that it wasn't BS&F, but I don't recall.
I am also not saying that a law firm can't be evil at the
core, just as companies can. Law firms, after all, are
companies run by people too. If someone can give me a way
(more that one is better) that a law firm could extract itself
from a case where a client is pursuing his case beyond all
reasonable logic, without it being overly damaging to the law
firm's business, then I would be the first to trumpet that
BS&F are a despicable law firm and that no decedent, moral
company should have anything to do with them.
After all, in a criminal law murders, rapists, and the like
are entitled to the best legal defense, and I do not condemn
the lawyers that represent them.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
