Mort Sullivan's Personal Opinion That
McDonald's Is Located In The Area, And
Would You Like To Eat Food With Ambient
Air In The Area Of Surrounding Properties,
And We Will Putting Up Signs & Asbestos Tape
Around McDonald's On The Sullivan Trust Property,
Where The Manager Called The Police On Mort Sullivan
For Cutting The Grass On The Sullivan Trust Property, And
Everyone Can See The Picture Below Showing Area!
If I understand this correctly, the McDonalds manager called the cops on Mort and then Mort fired back by filing a suit regarding lead and asbestos on the area. I'm not sure how Bucky got involved though.
I think reading from the bottom will give you the chronological order. Also, skipping over phrases like, “Mort Sullivan's Personal Opinion That...” helps a lot (that phrase, along with registering himself as an LLC is giving me strong sovcit vibes).
As to what actually started this, it looks like there was a landfill with alleged hazmat in it, but there wasn’t a lawsuit filed in time (under the Clean Water Act? Because there’s an underground stream that flows into the Missouri River?) to make the original polluters clean it up. Mort believes that because Bucky’s, the McDonalds, and other companies (see the expanding list of real estate developers on his list) are now developing the area (and digging basements into the landfill) the timer for a Clean Water Act lawsuit has restarted. He cares as his property is next to the former landfill.
That's generally my gist as well, although I'm not certain on the actual existence of the landfill, let alone what may or may not have been dumped into it.
It's really hard to understand, because this is clearly a vexatious litigant who seems to believe that the law is a set of magic incantations to let him do what he wants (not unlike the sovereign citizen bullcrap you allude to). And the fact that he's dragging anyone remotely connected to the location into it makes it even harder.
I assume both the "personal opinion" and "LLC" stuff is an attempt to shield himself from defamation claims (I'm not saying it's going to work, but you can't sue someone for a statement of opinion, and, maybe he believes that, were any suit to be filed, it'd have to be against his asset-bare LLC).
> Mort finished his motion to dismiss with a claim that the TCPA only applies to telemarketing harassment, not good-ole-fashioned harassment harassment.
Ah, the good old-fashioned "I wasn't taking advantage of him, I was just being an asshole for being an asshole's sake!" defense. How refreshing.
Seriously, the defense is "I wasn't calling him as part of my illegal scheme to call everybody with a phone number, I was calling him specifically because I hate him personally".
The offense is dialing someone using an automatic dialing system; the defense is perfectly plausible.
> Mort finished his motion to dismiss with a claim that the TCPA only applies to telemarketing harassment, not good-ole-fashioned harassment harassment. No dice. The Court looks at the words of the statute and cannot find the “I just want to abuse people out of spite” TCPA exemption.
Very relevant to the argument that all modern cell phones (as well as things like decidedly outdated handsets with speed dial) are in fact automatic dialing systems, and therefore everyone who places a call or sends a message using their cell phone is in violation of the law.
Doesn't matter how you use the device, just that the device meets the definition.
Editor’s Note: Welcome Hackers! Not sure how Hacker News found
this article but I see a ton of folks headed in from that
website, which I presume is some sort of aggregator for news
articles of interest to folks that like to hack stuff. Feel free
to have a look around the website–check out our cool podcast–and
tell any friends that might like this nerdy stuff. But don’t
hack anything please. Thanks.
Of course, now through the magic of Gravatar it looks like I'm talking on behalf of the entire HN community when my comment was merely tongue in cheek. Oh, well.
Leave it to lawyers to figure that 'Hacker News' is a bad guy collective.
Good thing that Wikipedia is here to help:
Reflecting the two types of hackers, there are two definitions of the word "hacker":
1. An adherent of the technology and programming subculture; see hacker
culture.
2. Someone who is able to subvert computer security. If doing so for
malicious purposes, the person can also be called a cracker.
"Editor’s Note: Welcome Hackers! Not sure how Hacker News found this article but I see a ton of folks headed in from that website, which I presume is some sort of aggregator for news articles of interest to folks that like to hack stuff. Feel free to have a look around the website–check out our cool podcast–and tell any friends that might like this nerdy stuff. But don’t hack anything please. Thanks. "
I mean, we use the term "hacker" consciously as a reclamation, we can hardly be surprised or affronted when people outside the circle mistake it for its more common negative meaning.
I suspect that people wanting to reclaim the term are over-represented in Wikipedia editors, too.
I am a little confused by the title. It is certainly an entertaining claim and argument by Mort, but it seems that the court decided quite reasonably (and the author says so?).
Is there some kind of template to make such a 1990's website https://buckysgasstationsucks.com/ with it's bizarro little animations and clipart? It's so very anachronistic (yet strangely readable I must add). I don't think I've seen anything like it since ages past.
Am hardly an expert on that side of mental illness but that's what it sounds like.
The actual time cube makes sense to me, sort of. Depending on where you start your day, say one of 4 places, you get 4 overlapping days, but only if you choose to recognise all 24-hour periods together. We don't but he does.
IIRC jews start their new day at sunrise, the roman new day started at sunset, westerners start their new day at midnight, the vikings' new day started at midday. I think I see what he's getting at although with mad people I guess you never know.