Monday, November 1, 2010


The desperate is their perspective - you see this in Montoya's pathetic post filed today. Why does Montoya lie - because he can - because ignorant people will always be ready to hang themselves with their delusional thinking.  I remain convinced this election is any one's guess.

FACTS: From day one my settlement discussions with the insurance companies in the lawsuit against Montoya/McHale/Sanchez/ and DPM was for $150,000.00. The number was not random - this is what Carlos Cisneros allegedly got.  In demand letters you use higher numbers for two reasons - to force the defendant to turn the demand over to his insurance company, and to be able to negotiate down.

Now if his attorney charged him 40% that would bring the number to $90,000.00 for Carlos - minus costs. I did not have to pay for investigators - I did not have to pay for depositions - the insurance companies paid for everything. You make a business decision - $60,000.00 was a good business decision. I suspect Montoya has never seen $60,000.00 in his life.

I defy Montoya to produce any document wherein I ever asked anyone to pay for me to fly to New York to visit my family - it never happened. I knew Sanchez was talking to McHale because McHale posted my joke that I would release him if he paid for my trip to Peru. OMFG he did pay for my trip to Peru. China is already paid for  - ala Wells Fargo.

Juan Montoya knows as much about law as he knows about ethics. You do not go through the court to get discovery in a lawsuit. In fact the discovery which is secured is not even filed with the court.

Quintanilla sued Zayas and myself. We are codefendants. I asked for all depositions taken in the Zayas/Cortez vs. Quintanilla case. That is actually how discovery is done. Zayas could have held my request for 30 days or he could produce it right away. Nothing and I mean nothing is filed with the court.

Ethical lawyers and litigants engage in formal and informal discovery all of the time. Ethics is certainly something Montoya or Quintanilla would never understand.

And finally we now know why Quintanilla can't find his aguacates and finally have me served. Apparently Luci Longoria's husband is mad as hell he is going to get deposed. If Quintanilla wants to lie and suggest I was suggesting Luci would cheat on her husband, something I would never do and have never done to anyone (that is the style of his partner in crime McHale) I am actually allowed to defend myself and depose her husband to see if there is any reason to believe she would cheat on him.  I am not the one who accused Luci of being part of his organization - Quintanilla testified to this under oath at the same time he testified that Pat Lehmann was helping him.   If Luci or her husband want to say Quintanilla committed perjury - I am cool with that.

I did not open this door, Quintanilla opened the door. He does this all of the time - he throws out false accusations and does not care if Luci Longoria is painted as a woman who would cheat on her husband. I never alleged it and never would. It is what scum like Quintanilla does to get what he wants.   It is what scum like McHale does to get what he wants.

My sources tell me Longoria's husband is actually a good man and is ready to take Quintanilla on for what he has done to his wife's reputation. He is not happy, my source is telling me.

This is the way the lawsuit is going to work - a federal judge in DC will decide if the federal law provides immunity to bloggers for anonymous posts, never found to apply for direct posts. In the new case we are dealing with direct posts.  The 7th circuit found there is nothing in the law which provides the immunity as found by the 9th circuit.

I have a year to file the lawsuit. I will use this time to work with the various insurance companies involved. I will also be allowed to seek all of the discovery I want from Quintanilla and the PAC through Quintanilla's lawsuit without ever having to sue the PAC or Quintanilla.

Actual knowledge matters when you go to court.

There were no appeals in the litigation. I do not think Montoya is lying on this one - he is just stupid. A mandamus is not an appeal. There were two.

The second was taken after the case settled on paper. The insurance companies understood what was happening. They had seen the evidence of the corruption coming from the State Bar of Texas and Texas Supreme Court. They allowed me to take the second mandamus so that I could use the documents as evidence in the complaint I have pending with the FBI. We knew they would never follow the law - this is why I filed the mandamus - to further prove the point. Again the case had settled - allowing me this last mandamus was part of the settlement.  Had the mandamus granted nothing would have changed in terms of the numbers.  McHale was the only one being held at that point. But once the Texas Supreme Court acted the settlement provided I had to release McHale without prejudice to refiling same.

The first involved an issue of prior restraint. After it was denied while preparing the documents for the FBI I went back over the subject order and realized Sanchez's moronic lawyers and Zavaletta failed to include language for future language - they only sought to restrict past comments. Hence no prior restraint. I am certain the Texas Supreme Court realized the same thing upon closer review of the order.  I will note none of Sanchez' incompetent lawyers or Peter Zavaletta bothered to point out to the Texas Supreme Court there was no prior restraint in the order.

As a trained mediator I learned you must reason with people in a business context. My settlement when you consider costs, (depositions, investigators) which I did not pay and attorneys fees, I did not do that much worse than Carlos Cisneros.

But I actually did better because it allowed me to pay for an ad in the Washington Post. Yea it is funny how things change when corrupt public officials realize you have the $85,000.00 for a full page age which exposes the truth.  Our discussions changed on that day. I never had to buy the ad.

Again it is a business decision. The portion of the Sanchez/Montoya money allowed for me to finally defend myself. The money which will come from that source, sooner than later will allow me to retire very comfortably by age 60 instead of 70.

I think the PAC thinks they are in trouble.  I cannot say I feel the same - the mood in this country is not good - this election remains any one's guess.


Anonymous said...

May I ask, What did the full page ad say?

BobbyWC said...

In terms of today's post there was no ad - it is something being put out by their media person - Montoya continues to hide this fact, but Bill Jorn of NBC 23 will testify that Juan Montoya represented to him he is the PAC's media person -

This means the PAC is liable for all of his lies.

why not just grow a pair Juan and admit to what you told Bill Jorn.

I only read his garbage real quick someone had to point out to me that Montoya considers a contract in the amount of $1,057,156.90, orchestrated by Antonio Juarez, Art Rendon, and Pat Lehmann for the benefit of Enrique Escobedo's brother when just 15 days later Enrique voted to reinstate Art Rendon - to be a nothing about nothing.

But Cortez helping a family member get a summer job is the end of humanity as we know it - now for the record if the latter is true - it was wrong.

Desperate is as desperate says.
Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

I think the first post is asking about the Washington Post ad. At least that is what I want to know.