[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: 
  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.
  Many thanks.
  I'll keep you posted on the results, particularly what happens during 
  oral argument of this case, which probably will be in open court, 
  interestingly enough!
  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