Davin News Server

On 12/26/2024 6:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 08:12:35 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 12/25/2024 7:09 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 07:20:34 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/24/2024 4:08 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 08:18:12 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/23/2024 5:59 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2024 07:27:59 -0800, Siri Cruise
>>>>>>>> <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Once again, if she knowingly published a poll with a known bad
>>>>>>>>>> methodology (as you had noted, she had the same issue in the past)
>>>>>>>>>> it's fraud.  That's what discovery is for.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So what if it is a fraud? First amendment, sunshine.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> First Amendment doesn't cover fraud with malicious intent, dimbulb.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who did she take money from?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Civil Code 3294. (3) “Fraud” means an intentional misrepresentation,
>>>>>>> deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with
>>>>>>> the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a person
>>>>>>> of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Excellent point! Even if Selzer acted fraudulently, Trump has to show
>>>>>> the poll caused him to lose money even though he didn't pay for the poll.
>>>>>
>>>>> "the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a
>>>>> person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury."
>>>>>
>>>>> That is not limited to money.
>>>>> What is the matter with you two?
>>>>
>>>> Siri quoted California law. Trump's lawsuit is in Iowa where the law states:
>>>>
>>>> "A consumer who suffers an ascertainable loss of money or property as
>>>> the result of a prohibited practice or act in violation of this chapter
>>>> may bring an action at law to recover actual damages."
>>>>
>>>> https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/714H.pdf
>>>
>>> This should be an interesting case.  Also in this law contains the
>>> following:
>>>
>>> "
>>> 2009 Acts, ch 167, §2, 9
>>> 714H.3 Prohibited practices and acts.
>>> 1. A person shall not engage in a practice or act the person knows or
>>> reasonably
>>> should know is an unfair practice, deception, fraud, false pretense,
>>> or false promise, or
>>> the misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, or omission of a
>>> material fact, with the
>>> intent that others rely upon the unfair practice, deception, fraud,
>>> false pretense, false
>>> promise, misrepresentation, concealment, suppression, or omission in
>>> connection with the
>>> advertisement, sale, or lease of consumer merchandise, or the
>>> solicitation of contributions for
>>> charitable purposes. For the purposes of this chapter, a claimant
>>> alleging an unfair practice,
>>> deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, or misrepresentation
>>> must prove that the
>>> prohibited practice related to a material fact or facts.
>>> “Solicitations of contributions for
>>> charitable purposes” does not include solicitations made on behalf of
>>> a political organization
>>> as defined in section 13C.1, solicitations made on behalf of a
>>> religious organization as
>>> defined in section 13C.1, solicitations made on behalf of a state,
>>> regionally, or nationally
>>> accredited college or university, or solicitations made on behalf of a
>>> nonprofit foundation
>>> benefiting a state, regionally, or nationally accredited college or
>>> university subject to section
>>> 509(a)(1) or 509(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986."
>>>
>>> While he may not be able to recover money, the law doesn't appear to
>>> stop him from suing under the law.
>>
>> No. Again:
> 
> I quote from the exact law to which you refer and you say 'no".

Your quote describes what constitutes a violation of the law. It does 
not say boo about how one goes to court to get relief from that 
violation. My quote does and is strictly limited to someone who has lost 
money or property.