DrinkerBiddle & Reath, LLP
H. Christian L’Orange
415-591-7500
clorange@dbr.com
June 21, 2006
VIA FACSIMILE, U.S. MAIL AND E-MAIL
RE: New Filing Date for Opening Appellate Brief
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Both Fey and my calendars reflected your appellate brief was due Monday, June 19th. We anticipated receiving it by e-mail by the close of business, not unlike the exchange of briefs by both sides with respect to the SLAPP action. When we didn’t receive anything yesterday, June 20th, we thought it best to contact your office and inquire as to when we could expect either an electronic or hard copy of the brief. Before doing so, we checked the Court’s website to confirm our calendar date of June 19th was correct.
Oh boohoo, Sir Chrisy the Sissy and Capella Stella had it on their calendars, boohoo. Of course, that reeks of hypocrisy as calendars seem to be meaningless when it comes time for these same two clowns to cough up more of their own spittle.
The disgusting thing is that Sir Chrisy the Sissy and Capella Stella have had no problem failing to send their own drivel to the plaintiff's counsel by e-mail or fax, not to mention their own endless and incessant delays that they've already caused. Of course, when they've whined about needing more time, it's always been granted - even when L'Orange required more than one day for one of his endless depositions (of course, neither he nor Capella Stella were PREPARED for those depositions). L'Orange also promised to finish one of the endless depositions "in a few days" and instead required WEEKS to get back to it.
Then there's the problem where L'Orange needs extensions for his own nonsense and, even then, he shows up GROSSLY UNPREPARED for his depositions. A few examples of his unprofessional behavior include:
- Not having his "exhibits" prepared - they're not tabbed, numbered, or, for that matter, even sent - L'Orange was so ill-prepared that he had to have some of his "exhibits" FAXed while the deposition was in progress.
- With all the extra time Sir Chrisy the Sissy gets, it also doesn't stop him from submitting the same items as many as FOUR times and required the use of separate identification numbers.
Let's not forget the little matter where Sir Chrisy the Sissy and Capella Stella have failed to submit complete copies of their vomitus to the plaintiff's attorney. One example happens to be the declaration of Capella's Cheerleader, Shawn Ambrose's. We've posted that obviously incomplete declaration here. It shouldn't be too difficult to note that a page is missing. Another example is the so-called declaration of Nancy Kolb - that one contains nothing but a bunch of nonsense. Gosh Chrisy, looks like you need to get your own unprofessional act together first, before you start your frivolous whines about others. |
|
While our review of the website confirmed that June 19th was correct, both of us were extraordinarily surprised to discover that on June 7th, you unilaterally contacted the Court, and orally requested a fourteen day extension. The Court’s website now reflects an amended filing date for your opening brief of July 3, 2006.
What?! The illustrious H. Christian L'Orange is actually capable of viewing a website? Surely, that must be a mistake?! After all, Sir Chrisy the Sissy and Capella Stella had to audacity to claim that this and other Capella Sucks sites contain more than 25,000 pages (they must be smoking something)! We can only hope that Sir Chrisy the Sissy looked at court's website again - the amended filing date for the opening brief is now set for August 2, 2006.
|
|
We reviewed the Court’s Local Rules with respect to this procedure. You are certainly within your rights to orally request a fourteen day extension. However, the rules which permit you to make the oral request for that extension clearly require you to (1) notify opposing counsel (us) that a request for oral extension will be sought, and (2) notify all other counsel (us again) immediately by letter to confirm the telephone extension of time and advise counsel (us) of the details of the extension. You neither afforded us the courtesy of contacting us with respect to the extension, nor complied with the rules of the Court.
Look's like Sir Chrisy the Sissy is so full of it that even his eyes are brown. Since when does he and Capella Stella bother to look at the Court's local rules?
- We don't believe that ANY rules were broken (and it's grossly hypocritical for him to whine about this in the first place considering all of the ones he and Capella Stella have already violated).
- Perhaps it's time for Sir Chrisy to learn how to read - we suggest rudimentary courses on reading comprehension first (assuming he's already learned his colors and shapes).
|
|
You will recall that you approached us in mid May asking for major modifications in the briefing dates for the various pleadings. We refused, stating that our client wanted to resolve the SLAPP matter as quickly as possible and move on with the case in chief.
Now isn't that too damn bad. Looks like Sir Chrisy the Sissy wants to have his cake and eat it too.
- How many modifications has he requested that already have been granted?
- He refused a simple matter like a calendar change because Capella University wants to resolve their frivolous SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) against a student as quickly as possible? Oh please, gag us with a spoon! You can't be serious?! Capella University continues their retaliation against a student and now they want to rush through their own countersuit? Surely, they're smoking something. If Capella really wanted to "move on with the case in chief" (the lawsuit that's been filed against Capella University) then they shouldn't have filed their frivolous countersuit to begin with.
|
|
It appears shortly thereafter, you contacted the Court seeking the telephone extension. The fact you unilaterally obtained the extension suggests you represented that you had contacted opposing counsel, and there was no opposition to your request. Neither of these premises is true.
Isn't that a shame?! As with Sir Chrisy's and Capella Stella's endless barrage of fecal matter that they have so consistently spewed at the court, they start making up their own "facts." One of the most bizarre examples to date (in addition to their claim that there are over 25,000 pages on Capella Sucks sites), is Vickie Cook's declaration that claims her mother's picture is plastered all over this site (a blatant lie). Priscilla McNulty's declaration is another example of Sir Chrisy's case speculationitis.
|
|
At the outset of the litigation, you and/or Mr. LaMarca [sic] quickly pointed out our failure to comply with the Court’s local rule by filing an opposition one font size too small.
Such rigorous and zealous enforcement of the Local Rules, we think you would agree, should be applied with equal verve to both parties in the litigation. Hence, this letter. If you wish to avail yourself of procedures outlined in the local rules in the future, we would appreciate compliance with all aspects of the rules, not just some or most. It would appear to be too late to lodge an objection or raise this issue with the Court, however by copy of this letter, we are asking the clerk to make it part of the appellate file.
Oh grow up, Sir Chrisy the Sissy. It's about time that you and Capella Stella started paying attention to the rules!
|
|
Very truly yours,
H. Christian L’Orange
HCL/ed
|
