Re: court of Appeal Upholds Libel Verdict Against Mold Activ
Posted by Sharon on 9/21/10
Apparently, you can't read. No. It is not over. Self admitted in the
Opinion, the courts did not do an independant review of the evidence of
the case. This is especially relevant to the uncontroverted evidence
of Kelman's perjury on the issue of malice while strategically
litigating, going unchecked in the San Diego courts for five years.
"..courts are required to independently examine the record to determine
whether it provides clear and convincing proof thereof." (McCoy v.
Hearst Corp. (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 1657, 1664."
On 9/20/10, Mike B. wrote:
> You lose, Sharon Kramer. Bottom line.
> Maybe you need to call the DA or something!?!
> It's over, Kramer.
> On 9/20/10, Sharon wrote:
>> Attack someone's character and you can be charged with a crime.
>> You mean like submitting false declarations to the court to make
>> a reason of why someone would have personal malice while
>> strategically litigating? Thanks for the heads up. I'll keep
>> in mind.
Posts on this thread, including this one