Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

Main

Date: 03 Jan 2009 16:09:29
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
District of New York? I hope not. Sam, please drop/discontinue the
USCF in your federal action. As long as your appeal is pending the case
is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.

I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.

Date: 03 Jan 2009 12:19:29
From:
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

On Jan 3, 10:09=A0am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected] > wrote:
> Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
> District of New York? =A0I hope not. =A0Sam, please drop/discontinue the
> USCF in your federal action. =A0As long as your appeal is pending the cas=
e
> is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>
> I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.

Lafferty is right. directors should not sue the corporation while
serving.The confusion is that Judge
Lafferty ought to be a director before being an officer, and he does
not know the difference. The Executive
Board is merely a subset of the Board of Direcotrs or Delegates, and
this confusion is wasting my time.

Marcus Roberts
Ambassador of St Kitts and Nevis
U.S. Citizen

Date: 03 Jan 2009 14:05:15
From:
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

On Jan 3, 3:19=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Jan 3, 10:09=A0am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
> > District of New York? =A0I hope not. =A0Sam, please drop/discontinue th=
e
> > USCF in your federal action. =A0As long as your appeal is pending the c=
ase
> > is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>
> > I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.
>
> Lafferty is right. directors should not sue the corporation while
> serving.The confusion is that Judge
> Lafferty ought to be a director before being an officer, and he does
> not know the difference. The Executive
> Board is merely a subset of the Board of Direcotrs or Delegates, and
> this confusion is wasting my time.
>
> Marcus Roberts
> Ambassador of St Kitts and Nevis
> U.S. Citizen

Marcus, we have written to the premier of St Kitts and Nevis [a
gentleman!] who admits he knows you not. I don't mind you being an
unofficial fellow on their chessic behest, but should you not moderate
you moniker, thereby?

Cordially, Phil Innes

Date: 03 Jan 2009 10:38:15
From: WPraeder
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

Date: 03 Jan 2009 09:32:24
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

On Jan 3, 11:09=A0am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected] > wrote:
> Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
> District of New York? =A0I hope not. =A0Sam, please drop/discontinue the
> USCF in your federal action. =A0As long as your appeal is pending the cas=
e
> is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>
> I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.

My suit is in the nature of a derivative suit where I am trying to
protect the corporation from those who are looting its assets.

It is a legal requirement in such suits that the subject corporation
be named as a defendant even though it is in reality the co-plaintiff.

So, there is no conflict of interest.

In addition, you are apparently not aware of this, but Bill Brock
still has a motion still pending in this case which his lawyer
recently renewed, so the case will stay alive until at least Bill
Brock's motion has been decided.

The case of Susan Polgar vs. USCF is entirely different. She is not
trying to protect the USCF from having its assets looted. Rather, she
is demanding that the USCF pay her $25 million for the damages that
she claims that the USCF has caused her.

Sam Sloan

Date: 03 Jan 2009 14:42:13
From:
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

Date: 03 Jan 2009 13:44:59
From:
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

On Jan 3, 12:32=A0pm, samsloan <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Jan 3, 11:09=A0am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
> > District of New York? =A0I hope not. =A0Sam, please drop/discontinue th=
e
> > USCF in your federal action. =A0As long as your appeal is pending the c=
ase
> > is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>
> > I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.
>
> My suit is in the nature of a derivative suit where I am trying to
> protect the corporation from those who are looting its assets.

Its assets? Isn't the corporation for which you vicariously represent,
(a) in massive deficit from year to year to the tune of $100,000 and
have you not said so yourself? (b) you talk as if you represent the
'corporation' itself though it actually does not accord with your
views , and (c) you speak about your cause 'looting' without any
actual evidence of looting?

R

O

F

L

!

!

!
!

!

Apart from these three things, what have you?

You do not actually contest any of those things with those who think
at all, and your are a bit 'in your head' about them, no? Or, you are
a fantacist who despite 8,000 negative commentaries about Susan Polgar
going back 6 years, deny you are obsessed.

It is always prospective to ask politicians if what they do has
anything to do with what they say. Otherwise they just mouth-off as if
people didn't suspect actual behavior as contradicting the golden
words.

The Sloan actually denied 8,000+ negative mentions as not being
obsessed!!!

By which measure should anyone pay him attention? Will his attention
ever escape his obsession? Answer if you will, but note that for the
preceding 8 year the answer is a resolute 'NOT!'

[Laugh]

These rather fundamental issues seem to go without notice by those who
vote for the Sloan or would trust his orientation to any objective
truth of what would benefit chess in the USA.

Instead we witness a massive egocentricity.

That is his actual measure, demonstrated here every day from his own
keyboard - no matter how **obviously** mean or vile his distortions
are, or how his supporters cannot seem to notice same, these half
dozen or 10 people willing to overlook them.

Decency, USA numbers in the hundred thousands to contradict their
manipulations.

You, Mr. Sloan, are the Worm-tongue candidate from Mordor. Beware
those who work you will sacrifice you as easily as you treat truth and
decency.

Phil Innes

Date: 03 Jan 2009 10:53:55
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

On Jan 3, 1:04=A0pm, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected] > wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 12:51 pm, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> samsloan wrote:
> >>> On Jan 3, 11:09 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
> >>>> District of New York? =A0I hope not. =A0Sam, please drop/discontinue=
the
> >>>> USCF in your federal action. =A0As long as your appeal is pending th=
e case
> >>>> is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
> >>>> I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.
> >>> My suit is in the nature of a derivative suit where I am trying to
> >>> protect the corporation from those who are looting its assets.
> >>> It is a legal requirement in such suits that the subject corporation
> >>> be named as a defendant even though it is in reality the co-plaintiff=
.
> >>> So, there is no conflict of interest.
> >>> In addition, you are apparently not aware of this, but Bill Brock
> >>> still has a motion still pending in this case which his lawyer
> >>> recently renewed, so the case will stay alive until at least Bill
> >>> Brock's motion has been decided.
> >>> The case of Susan Polgar vs. USCF is entirely different. She is not
> >>> trying to protect the USCF from having its assets looted. Rather, she
> >>> is demanding that the USCF pay her $25 million for the damages that
> >>> she claims that the USCF has caused her.
> >>> Sam Sloan
> >> Wrong, your suit is NOT in the nature of a derivative action. =A0NOT A=
T
> >> ALL. =A0If you don't drop the USCF, I hope they keep you off the ballo=
t.
> >> Then you can try to get an Illinois judge to order the EB to put you
> >> back on the ballot. =A0It's decision time Sam.
>
> > Sorry, I have heard you express a lot of off the wall legal opinions,
> > but this one takes it.
>
> > Virtually every allegation of my complaint is about corporate
> > malfeasance, so it is in the nature of a derivative suit.
>
> > Sam Sloan
>
> You haven't a legal clue on this one Sam. =A0I'm going to urge the EB to
> keep you off the ballot until you drop the USCF as a defendant. This
> will be a major campaign issue if they don't throw you off the ballot.

I have tried to be very polite to you since you claim to be a lawyer
but I cannot allow this ridiculous statement that you are making pass.

There is no such rule that stated that someone who is suing a
corporation cannot be elected to the board of a corporation. Indeed,
the opposite is the case. The result of these suits is that the
plaintiff often winds up on the board.

Secondly, I lack the power to drop the suit. The suit was dismissed
months ago. It is still alive however since Bill Brock keeps filing
motions in the case.

Thirdly, even if I had the power to do so and if I made a request to
drop the USCF from the defendants, that request could not be granted
by the courts without permission by all the opposing parties. All of
the defendants would have to agree to drop the USCF from the case. I
am surprised that you do not seem to know this. Needless to say, not
all of them would agree.

The same point applied to the Polgar vs, USCF suit. She keeps saying
that she will drop the USCF alone from the suit if the USCF will pay
her one dollar plus apologize and admit wrong doing. Even assuming
that the USCF were to agree to these conditions there would have to be
notice and opportunity for a heaering before the court to give the
other 14 parties a chance to object. You can be sure that they would
not object and almost without doubt the motion would not be granted.

I guess that you do not know as much about law as you think you do. I
have a lot of knowledge and experience in this field because I was for
many years the principle of a registered securities firm and these
cases often arose with respect to securities I was trading. I also
wrote a book about this entitled "How to Take Over a Publicly Held
Corporation". ISBN 1-881373-01-0

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ean=3D188137301=
0

I recommend that you go down to your local Barnes and Noble Bookstore,
buy and read a copy of my book and study it carefully, before you try
to commit the USCF to another expensive and ultimately unsuccessful
lawsuit.

Just because you once worked as a parking ticket judge does not make
you qualified in this rarefied atmosphere.

Sam Sloan

Date: 03 Jan 2009 10:02:29
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

On Jan 3, 12:51=A0pm, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected] > wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 11:09 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
> >> District of New York? =A0I hope not. =A0Sam, please drop/discontinue t=
he
> >> USCF in your federal action. =A0As long as your appeal is pending the =
case
> >> is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>
> >> I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.
>
> > My suit is in the nature of a derivative suit where I am trying to
> > protect the corporation from those who are looting its assets.
>
> > It is a legal requirement in such suits that the subject corporation
> > be named as a defendant even though it is in reality the co-plaintiff.
>
> > So, there is no conflict of interest.
>
> > In addition, you are apparently not aware of this, but Bill Brock
> > still has a motion still pending in this case which his lawyer
> > recently renewed, so the case will stay alive until at least Bill
> > Brock's motion has been decided.
>
> > The case of Susan Polgar vs. USCF is entirely different. She is not
> > trying to protect the USCF from having its assets looted. Rather, she
> > is demanding that the USCF pay her $25 million for the damages that
> > she claims that the USCF has caused her.
>
> > Sam Sloan
>
> Wrong, your suit is NOT in the nature of a derivative action. =A0NOT AT
> ALL. =A0If you don't drop the USCF, I hope they keep you off the ballot.
> Then you can try to get an Illinois judge to order the EB to put you
> back on the ballot. =A0It's decision time Sam.

Sorry, I have heard you express a lot of off the wall legal opinions,
but this one takes it.

Virtually every allegation of my complaint is about corporate
malfeasance, so it is in the nature of a derivative suit.

Sam Sloan

Date: 03 Jan 2009 18:04:25
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

samsloan wrote:
> On Jan 3, 12:51 pm, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> samsloan wrote:
>>> On Jan 3, 11:09 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
>>>> District of New York? I hope not. Sam, please drop/discontinue the
>>>> USCF in your federal action. As long as your appeal is pending the case
>>>> is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>>>> I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.
>>> My suit is in the nature of a derivative suit where I am trying to
>>> protect the corporation from those who are looting its assets.
>>> It is a legal requirement in such suits that the subject corporation
>>> be named as a defendant even though it is in reality the co-plaintiff.
>>> So, there is no conflict of interest.
>>> In addition, you are apparently not aware of this, but Bill Brock
>>> still has a motion still pending in this case which his lawyer
>>> recently renewed, so the case will stay alive until at least Bill
>>> Brock's motion has been decided.
>>> The case of Susan Polgar vs. USCF is entirely different. She is not
>>> trying to protect the USCF from having its assets looted. Rather, she
>>> is demanding that the USCF pay her $25 million for the damages that
>>> she claims that the USCF has caused her.
>>> Sam Sloan
>> Wrong, your suit is NOT in the nature of a derivative action. NOT AT
>> ALL. If you don't drop the USCF, I hope they keep you off the ballot.
>> Then you can try to get an Illinois judge to order the EB to put you
>> back on the ballot. It's decision time Sam.
>
> Sorry, I have heard you express a lot of off the wall legal opinions,
> but this one takes it.
>
> Virtually every allegation of my complaint is about corporate
> malfeasance, so it is in the nature of a derivative suit.
>
> Sam Sloan
You haven't a legal clue on this one Sam. I'm going to urge the EB to
keep you off the ballot until you drop the USCF as a defendant. This
will be a major campaign issue if they don't throw you off the ballot.

Date: 03 Jan 2009 17:51:50
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Re: Will Sam Sloan Pull A Polgar or Do the Right Thing

samsloan wrote:
> On Jan 3, 11:09 am, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Will he run for the USCF EB while suing the USCF in the Southern
>> District of New York? I hope not. Sam, please drop/discontinue the
>> USCF in your federal action. As long as your appeal is pending the case
>> is still alive and you have a conflict to address as a candidate.
>>
>> I'm betting Sam will do the right thing.
>
> My suit is in the nature of a derivative suit where I am trying to
> protect the corporation from those who are looting its assets.
>
> It is a legal requirement in such suits that the subject corporation
> be named as a defendant even though it is in reality the co-plaintiff.
>
> So, there is no conflict of interest.
>
> In addition, you are apparently not aware of this, but Bill Brock
> still has a motion still pending in this case which his lawyer
> recently renewed, so the case will stay alive until at least Bill
> Brock's motion has been decided.
>
> The case of Susan Polgar vs. USCF is entirely different. She is not
> trying to protect the USCF from having its assets looted. Rather, she
> is demanding that the USCF pay her $25 million for the damages that
> she claims that the USCF has caused her.
>
> Sam Sloan

Wrong, your suit is NOT in the nature of a derivative action. NOT AT
ALL. If you don't drop the USCF, I hope they keep you off the ballot.
Then you can try to get an Illinois judge to order the EB to put you
back on the ballot. It's decision time Sam.