[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Star Chamber Example
The below letter was sent to free-share subscribers of the Anti-Monopoly
vs. Hasbro antitrust case:
LETTER # 2 TO SHARE SUBSCRIBERS.
This letter is to advise you, as share subscribers, that defendant
Hasbro has served and filed its brief (in the 2nd Circuit Court of
Appeals) as defendant-appellee in this antitrust action.
I would like to tell you what Hasbro has argued, but unfortunmately for
you and the country at large Hasbro has chosen to file its brief under
seal, for attorneys only, so that not only you cannot learn what Hasbro
is arguing, but the plaintiff (Anti-Monopoly, Inc., its principal,
Ralph Anspach), the U.S. Justice Department, the Federal Trade
Commission, other injured companies in the toy and game business and
the 50 state attorneys general are unable to find out what Hasbro is
doing (or arguing).
I had made a motion in the Court below to permit the records to be
unsealed, which was denied; and I had made a motion in the 2nd Circuit
for similar relief, and the motion was denied.
If this appeal by Anti-Monopoly is denied (as the vast majority of
appeals are) then this whole exercise will be a waste; nobody will know
on what basis the the Courts will have decided the case.
I have worked on several projects designed to change the court system,
including a for profit court system (which I call the National Private
Court) and more recently I have figured out what the country is going
to do to replace a court system which for most persons who have tried
to use the courts to obtain relief from seemingly illegal antitrust
practices seems to be unworkable.
Please do me a favor and think of what changes could result as a
predictable consequence of a court system which usually fails to
provide any relief from excessive concentration of the economy, and
e-mail your thoughts to me. I would like to see if my predictions
match any of your predictions.
I'll keep you posted on the results, particularly what happens during
oral argument of this case, which probably will be in open court,
Carl E. Person
Carl E. Person, 325 W 45 St NYC. Tel: 212-307-4444; Fax: 212-307-0247.
Founder of LawMall (tm) http://www.lawmall.com (for plaintiffs);
RPAMall (tm) http://www.lawmall.com/rpa/rpa_menu1.html (for victims of
price discrimination and violation of Robinson-Patman Act); and ShareMall
(tm) http://www.lawmall.com/shares/sh_menu1.html which offers FREE
ferable) shares in current antitrust litigation to anyone with an e-mail