Merged - is this for real?? about vick..

[kgsmith]

Prisoner sues Vick for $63 billion | ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/falcons/stories/2007/07/27/vickbrite_0727.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab)

[Undertaker #59]

More info from the same site:

Enterprising litigant Jonathan Lee Riches, who recently filed a handwritten lawsuit against embattled Falcons quarterback Michael Vick alleging everything from stolen copyrighted property to "microwave testing" to a shady arms deal with Iran, is back at it. This time Riches, a prisononer in Salters, S.C., demands the judge in the case recuse himself.

He doesn't actually name the judge.

But Riches, once again submitting a handwritten document, alleges his magistrate has certain conflicts of interest that could taint the previously filed case. That's the one, legal scholars no doubt recall, where he claims Vick stole Riches' dogs for dogfighting purposes, sold them on eBay and used the proceeds to buy missiles from the Iranian government. In that filing Riches demanded $63 billion "backed by gold and silver," and delivered by Sandy Springs-based UPS, for his trouble.

In the Aug. 6 motion, Riches ticks off a slew of alleged violations of his state and federal constitutional rights, and says he wants the judge's "yearly financial disclosure forms." He lobs in a few more complaints against Vick, claiming No. 7 "hired robotic guards" at the prison Riches is in, and that Vick supposedly sold Riches' name to a CNN producer.

That's not all. "Michael Vick threw snowballs at plaintiff's car," the motion alleges.

We learn a little more about Riches in his latest missive. Namely, he says he's doing time for "wire fraud, identity theft, hacking, 'phishing,' spamming and conspiracy."

Professor Stan Goldman of Loyola Law School Los Angeles is an expert in celebrity litigation, and frequently comments on celebrity-driven lawsuits.

"You see frivolous celebrity-driven cases all the time, and there are consequences," he said. " Legal fees are very expensive. And you have to respond to the suit; if you don't, you'll be in default and lose. Sometimes, these cases turn out to be a needless expense just at a time when the celebrity doesn't need it. There are responses, however, because filing a frivolous lawsuit is typically a violation of an attorney's canon of ethics for the attorney suing the celebrity."

No such problem in Riches' case: he's representing himself.

[luso2kx]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293268,00.html

Man, that Vick. Dog abuser, herpes giver, terroist sympathizer...


NOTE: I may not like Vick, but even I think this lawsuit is a friggin joke

[MillarTime15]

is that a joke or is that real?

[Mikiemo83]

is that a joke or is that real?
IT IS A REAL WASTE OF TIME BY SOME JOKE INMATE

[luso2kx]

Note the "63,000,000,000 billion". He's suing Vick for $63,000,000,000,000,000,000.

I don't think the US Treasury, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and the European Central Bank have that much money combined

[3 Point Stan]

"Muhammad" Mexico

[Redsoxfan57]

"Muhammad" Mexico

Don't you mean Ron Mexico?

[southcarolina]

This guy has a bunch of these type lawsuits.

http://dockets.justia.com/search.py?query=jonathan+riches&l=&mode=rss