Davin News Server

On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 08:26:55 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
<noway@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 12/27/2024 7:31 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 08:36:20 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth
>> <noway@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 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.
>> 
>> It does state what actions would qualify as actionable so not exactly
>> honest of you to leave it out.
>
>I did not leave it out. I quoted it above (repeated here):
>
>"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."

You left out eveything (paragraphs worth of criteria) that I provided
from your citation.

>
>Trump may not sue unless he can state that he lost money or property as 
>a result of the poll.

That will be a matter for the courts to decide.  We shall see.
Not sure how many times I'll have to repeat this for you.