rawkodd 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Gold's agreement for WSOP winnings was oral, no?gold decided on his own to settle that claim not fight it... not because they had a decent case against him Link to post Share on other sites
Pivvy2001 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 call me on the phone do i have an offer for younot sure what this weak attempt at humor was hoping to prove. Your statement is still inaccurate. Do you think that Gold would have settled the claim if it was per se invalid? Really? That makes sense to you?Post some statutes, case law, anything. You made an assertion, Tim Wakefield called you out on it and was right and now you are making yourself look increasingly more stupid. As I said there are restrictions on contracts that are not in writing (for example monetary limits on the value of goods that can be sold via an oral contract pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code), and if any person wanted to learn about the extent to which an oral contract will be binding they should consult with an attorney and check their respective state's statutes. I am not offering legal opinion and have not read the lawsuit at issue in this thread; I am, however, stating unequivocally, that your broad generalization is completely inaccurate. Again, I repeat, to anyone reading this don't take legal advice from a poker forum, contact an attorney, they will know the law regarding when an oral contract is binding in your jurisdiction. Link to post Share on other sites
rjkdb8 1 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 verbal contracts exceding $500 are not legally bindingWrong. Link to post Share on other sites
rjkdb8 1 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 She must have a case or else she wouldn't enter into such a costly process.What? By that reasoning every lawsuit that has ever been filed was/is meritorious. I do think it is interesting that she was offered 250K, but her lawsuit certainly doesnt have merit just because she hired someone to file on her behalf. And she probably isnt paying her lawyer anyway. Link to post Share on other sites
SlapStick 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 The guy had a recording of Gold I think. Apparently Clonie does not Link to post Share on other sites
Mercury69 3 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 She looks like an ex-escort, sometime crack addict I used to bang, therefore I'd still hit it for old time sake Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 I think the hate going on against her is due to the realization that she just shit all over her friends, which from a professional standpoint, will most likely hurt her immensely.Daniels convictions seem pretty solid because, he either he knows the depth of the behind the scenes reality of this situation, and or knows that this woman is not well liked (for what ever reason). Either way, Clonie has screwed the poker royalty pooch, and win or lose, they will never forget it. Link to post Share on other sites
Wiz Adult 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 What? By that reasoning every lawsuit that has ever been filed was/is meritorious. I do think it is interesting that she was offered 250K, but her lawsuit certainly doesnt have merit just because she hired someone to file on her behalf. And she probably isnt paying her lawyer anyway. What I was suggesting was considering the circumstances of this case: ie being offered 250k by Lederer, such must have a valid reason for proceeding or else she wouldn't take such a monumental risk. This is not true for all court cases, obviously lol. Link to post Share on other sites
rawkodd 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 http://www.pdhonline.org/courses/p139/p139content.pdfhttp://www.contractorslicense.com/0-61writing.htmlhttp://books.google.com/books?id=-U0LAAAAY...5&ct=resulthttp://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opini...OpinionId=18646http://74.125.95.104/search?q=cache:0ZOnEu...cd=45&gl=ussorry i guess they recently changed it to $5,000... you can esad now thanx.it was $500 for decades kiddies... Link to post Share on other sites
rjkdb8 1 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 http://www.pdhonline.org/courses/p139/p139content.pdfhttp://www.contractorslicense.com/0-61writing.htmlhttp://books.google.com/books?id=-U0LAAAAY...5&ct=resulthttp://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us/opini...OpinionId=18646http://74.125.95.104/search?q=cache:0ZOnEu...cd=45&gl=ussorry i guess they recently changed it to $5,000... you can esad now thanx.it was $500 for decades kiddies...Those random links do not establish that all contracts involving amounts greater than $500 (or $5000) must be in writing, as you originally asserted. You are clearly trying to direct our attention to the provisions of the UCC or statute of frauds that have already been mentioned by other posters and mandate only that contracts involving a certain amount and a sale of goods must be in writing. That does not apply to all agreements and would have no application whatsoever in the instant case. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 I can't believe all the resentment towards Clonie in this thread... she seems like such a nice woman to me, and I'd be willing to bet that she's never taken any drugs, or done anything immoral in order to get some money, in her life.Maybe you're all jealous (including Daniel), of her loveable personlity, good looks and charm.QFT. There's also a level of misogyny in these posts ( not from DN, just the posters in general) that I find disturbing. It's like you can't respect her, as a person or a poker player, because she's a beautiful woman. She's thin, so she must be a meth addict, etc. From what I understand she's a nice and naturally beautiful Christian woman from Texas, all the insinuations other wise in this thread I think are classless. Link to post Share on other sites
DanielNegreanu 141 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 BigD is right that Daniel's bias is showing a little bit here. I am not saying that he lacks insight into FTP. In fact, I am sure that he has a great deal of insight; however, I also don't believe that the insiders at FTP are sharing everything with him (regardless of close friendships) because of: (a) the questionable legality of their operating and being part-owners of a gambling site in the U.S.; (B) his affiliation with a rival site; and © the fact that he posts things on an Internet forum, which makes him wonderfully accessible to fans like me, but somewhat of a liability for persons that are looking to avoid commentary on their legal affairs. To be clear, I am not at all insinuating that DN is incapable of using discretion or keeping secrets, but I am saying that even his comments in this thread would be more than I would want to see if I were involved in a lawsuit. Clonie did not post the link. The link in this thread is a Justia link, which is a legal service. In other words she didn't have to leak anything, it is a service.And for the person that said that verbal contracts over $500 are not binding, I am hoping that you are not a lawyer, as you are grossly overstating the facts and doing so to such a degree that I imagine that you are just speculating with not actual basis. I am not providing any legal opinion here, just stating that your statement is accurate only in limited situations and rather than making sweeping generalizations you should be more specific. This link was posts on 2+2 the day it was filed. It was posted by an account with 4 posts, all coincidentally having to do with Clonie and FTP. Coincidence? No, it was her. As or Clonie, naming random people associated with FTP in a lawsuit is extremely irresponsible and inappropriate. It's like she's just throwing darts and guessing. She's not going to make any friends doing that. I mean, Mike Matusow? Like he needs to be on that suit, it's ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites
NaturalNine 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 If she wasn't promised 1% of FTP then what did she get? If I remember correctly she has been on Team FT since the very beginning yet claims to have received no compensation because she was under the assumption she owned 1% of the company. That doesn't sound so far fetched looking from the outside. All FTP has to do is provide proof of transactions ($) between her and FTP over the last 4 years for her services. Link to post Share on other sites
Pivvy2001 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 This link was posts on 2+2 the day it was filed. It was posted by an account with 4 posts, all coincidentally having to do with Clonie and FTP. Coincidence? No, it was her. I was referring to the link at the start of this thread. I apologize for misunderstanding your post. That said, this information was available on the Internet all along via Justia and other sources. If you are upset that Clonie brought attention to it that is fair (although is not what I understood you to be saying) As or Clonie, naming random people associated with FTP in a lawsuit is extremely irresponsible and inappropriate. It's like she's just throwing darts and guessing. She's not going to make any friends doing that. I mean, Mike Matusow? Like he needs to be on that suit, it's ridiculous.if Matusow is truly not at all involved in the ownership of FTP that would be unnecessary, but she also might not have enough insight into its ownership to know what stake he does or doesn't have (athough this would seemingly undercut her arguments regarding having an ownership stake herself) Rawkodd, you are proving that you are a moron. It is impossible that anyone reading your posts in this thread thinks that you are anything but a moron. You are referring to the UCC, which I noted above. You are ignoring that fact. You are also ignoring its utter lack of relevance to the dispute in issue. The fact that you don't acknowledge that you are lost in the discussion is sad. The fact that you add esad as if that colloquial little acronym makes you a tough guy is similarly pathetic. I assume that you are just upset that you are being forced to eat shit with every post you make in this thread. Link to post Share on other sites
DanielNegreanu 141 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 If she wasn't promised 1% of FTP then what did she get? If I remember correctly she has been on Team FT since the very beginning yet claims to have received no compensation because she was under the assumption she owned 1% of the company. That doesn't sound so far fetched looking from the outside. All FTP has to do is provide proof of transactions ($) between her and FTP over the last 4 years for her services. So how does anyone believe she got "no compensation?" Has she not played a ton of WPT and WSOP events? Where did that money come from? Link to post Share on other sites
GetSprung 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 So how does anyone believe she got "no compensation?" Has she not played a ton of WPT and WSOP events? Where did that money come from?So you're saying Clonie is worse than dead money in every tourney she plays? Sounds about right. Link to post Share on other sites
BigDMcGee 3,352 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 So how does anyone believe she got "no compensation?" Has she not played a ton of WPT and WSOP events? Where did that money come from?I assumed, since she is a Full Tilt pro and all, that it came from her poker bankroll. Link to post Share on other sites
cardcore 0 Posted November 16, 2008 Share Posted November 16, 2008 Big sigh.fwiw, I heard she went off the deep end too, but I heard it awhile ago. The lawsuit sucks, and even though I'm sure nobody wants to see Clonie get a dime, it might be better if it just gets settled. Link to post Share on other sites
aadams_22 3 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 When you sue someone, might as well sue everyone, doesn't really cost anymore to add a few names... the innocent parties will be sorted out and removed from the lawsuitAlso, she's going to be absolutely hated on for this for her entire life, is she aware of that?If she comes away with a big payday I doubt she will give a shit about what people think about her. Link to post Share on other sites
NaturalNine 0 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 So how does anyone believe she got "no compensation?" Has she not played a ton of WPT and WSOP events? Where did that money come from?Going back to my point; FTP should provide the contract or agreement stating that she was given tournament buy-ins for promotion and/or provide proof of all money transactions (since buy-ins run up to 10k multiple times there should be a long paper trail going all the way back to the beginning of Full Tilt) etc so her case would have no chance in court. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Why was Howard Lederer sleeping with Clonie?I thought she was with Humberto anyway?What is going on here? Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Hmmm...wonderrrr what the Hardcore poker show's gonna talk about Wednesday?..... Link to post Share on other sites
profxavier9 0 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 well, if it was done by verbal agreement, then only a god cam could give us the proof we'd need to settle that bet. Listen, I'm not saying it would make sense for them to give her 1 percent, and I'd be shocked that they'd sign a contract for 1 percent.. but that doesn't mean she wasn't promised things that weren't delivered, or led to believe it's 1 percent. I don't know the woman, but she doesn't seem like the type that would just make up a story like this. She seems really nice. She doesn't seem smart enough to be a con woman. try thinking with your head and not your ****. She seems pretty slimey to me. Watch her on some of the PAD. Whatever the female term for "douche" is where id put her.your right about her not being smart enough to be a con woman. Link to post Share on other sites
TB17 0 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 cycalona! Link to post Share on other sites
JustLikeNegs 1 Posted November 17, 2008 Share Posted November 17, 2008 Clonie < Slag Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now