That would suffice if there was only 2 practicing attorneys in this country . And are those 2 licensed to practice in the state where the incident occurred? And yes it does matter if they are licensed to practice in New York. If they are not then your point is well pointless. because their opinion is meaningless.
Dana White posts video of FedEx worker throwing packages into truck in NYC
- Thread starter worldwide
- Start date
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
Beyond idiotic. How about we call a lawyer in NYC right now. I can hear the laughter at you already. You might be one of the dumbest people I have ever dealt with.
There you go again .Another uneducated juris appointing himself the arbiter to unilaterally decide if the individual is entitled to due process
That's your choice if you're willing to pay for his time.
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
No you call You're the one that doesn't want to believe anybody so you call but I want to be on the phone call as well if not just shut the hell up with this.
you are a
ing maroon.Wrong When it comes to matters such as this I believe the opinions of those individuals who are qualified to make them and you're not one of them.
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
Then call like I've said Don't push it off on other people because you won't believe them you call and you get their answers or even better how about you go through packages out in public and let somebody video you and send it to FedEx you tell us how your court case goes. If you're not willing to do it then seriously shut up about this because you know for a fact you're wrong.
Once again answer the question: If a legal pathway can be found is this person entitled to due process of law ? Yes or no?. If no then base it on rule of law not UPS company policy like you've used up to this point . It doesn't apply.
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
I haven't used UPS policy you have it in your thick skull that that's all we do now shut the hell up if you won't actually go test the theory out yourself since you don't want to believe anybody. I've given you answers just cuz you don't like them doesn't mean they're wrong.
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
Legal Referral Service
(212) 626-7373
Legal Referral Service - Google Search
Did a quick search for you. Free consult. Call tomorrow. I want a recording
I'm just so you know they've been in the business for over 75 years 3K reviews and five stars
(212) 626-7373
Legal Referral Service - Google Search
Did a quick search for you. Free consult. Call tomorrow. I want a recording
I'm just so you know they've been in the business for over 75 years 3K reviews and five stars
LOL All you guys ever talk about is based on UPS policy rather than rule of law. And if there is a civil action in behalf of this worker rule of law is the only thing that will matter.
Now if a legal pathway can be found and how do you know that there isn't one then why in your opinion should this individual not be granted the opportunity to seek relief? If you think he isn't then you tell me why.
Just A UPS Guy
Bully.
What in the actual
?
Thebrownblob
Well-Known Member
@bacha29 worldWhat in the actual
Why should I do this when you are the guys who are all saying that he has no legal recourse, Therefore it's incumbent on you to prove to me that he doesn't have one. if you're so dead certain that he doesn't then provide the rule of law Show me what you basing it on I still say that IF a legal pathway can be found should he not be afforded his chance to prevail?
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
Crazy
And I've already told you that will employee breaking company policy in public where it is legal to record anything and anywhere.
Already did you said so that didn't count done it multiple times actually and each time you say it doesn't count so no the burden of proof is now on you cuz you won't believe anybody even if we did call.
And I've already told you that will employee breaking company policy in public where it is legal to record anything and anywhere.
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
What in the actual
Let's try once again. Dana White was trying to be funny and entertaining. The question is while in the course of trying to be funny and entertaining his brand was he negligent and culpable and it cost the worker his job especially if his video was the way in which FDX found out about it. It may not have been intentional but nevertheless it happened and should he not be held accountable?
It's like the at fault driver in a wreck where someone was injured. He obviously preferred that it not happen but never the less it did happen and he was responsible. Now Mr. White might not have meant for the worker to lose his job as a result of his actions but nevertheless it still happened.
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
Legally they're still no recourse again this is why I called what I lawyer buddy there is no recourse there is no law broken. How many people have been fired because ring doorbells have caught them doing dumb smile*. Do you think they have a legal recourse no they don't. Again you're an idiot trying to chase someone who's politics you don't like and it's pathetic
Did you ask him about White being negligent and culpable because while he may not have meant any harm to the worker nevertheless there was harm done in which White had a role in it. Now did you bring this matter up to him?
Brown Down
Well-Known Member
Worker did all the harm to himself. The law was actually quite clear if it is visible in public they can be recorded with no recourse. That's a simple law all over. There is no negligence or comparable because it was in public. I would ask if you were really this dumb but you've proven it more than once today that you really are now go away
