Carter Hargrave

[Iainkelt]

I won't argue anymore (as I should be studying anyway...) after this. But under federal rules of civil procedure (many states have adopted the FRCP with a few changs. Rule 26 is almost universally the same) 26(b) it must be relevant to the proceedings and non privileged. As for the form letters, it would not be relevant to the proceedings. The certificates and everything else related to a slander suit he would bring would be.

I may have misinterpreted your post. Sorry.

Not to be a dick, but this isn't really a correct understanding of the rule. Although you are reading the actual wording correctly, discovery is generally allowed to cover a wide range of material even if that material ultimately is not admissible in court. Granted, discovery is not a free pass to demand absolutely anything under the sun, but you would likely be able to ask for previous letters/threats to show a pattern of behavior (just not that such behavior means that he did X, Y, or Z in THIS case). He would likely object to such a discovery request and then you would ultimately end up fighting it out in court with him likely losing on this particular point.

[bigskymma]

Not to be a dick, but this isn't really a correct understanding of the rule. Although you are reading the actual wording correctly, discovery is generally allowed to cover a wide range of material even if that material ultimately is not admissible in court. Granted, discovery is not a free pass to demand absolutely anything under the sun, but you would likely be able to ask for previous letters/threats to show a pattern of behavior (just not that such behavior means that he did X, Y, or Z in THIS case). He would likely object to such a discovery request and then you would ultimately end up fighting it out in court with him likely losing on this particular point.

As I said, just a simple 1L 6 months removed from Civ Pro I. However, rule 26(b)(1) states that it must be relevant to a claim or defense. If Hargrave filed a slander suit against you, discovering his form letter about it is not related to the claim. Even though he may have threatened everyone under the sun about slander, I would argue it does relate to the merits of this case.

That said, we should probably move this to P.M. to prevent a cull if we wanted to discuss this further. Though Civ Pro was one of my least favorite classes, I do enjoy the mental exercise and the break from studying for Contracts (the Parole Evidence rule can go f itself right along with K interpertation) and Torts.

[Cy Q. Faunce]

However, rule 26(b)(1) states that it must be relevant to a claim or defense. If Hargrave filed a slander suit against you, discovering his form letter about it is not related to the claim.

False. If your countersuit claims that the plaintiff is guilty of malicious prosecution in his claims, a pattern of such behavior is relevant.

Seriously, STFU. I'm not a lawyer, but at least I'm no idiot.

[bigskymma]

False. If your countersuit claims that the plaintiff is guilty of malicious prosecution in his claims, a pattern of such behavior is relevant.

Seriously, STFU. I'm not a lawyer, but at least I'm no idiot.

Easy brother. Read my first post, I said if you made a counter-claim for malicious prosecution then it would be relevant.

[It is Fake]

You know you are arguing like a BJJ white belt right? Not saying you are wrong but, that is actually who you sound like right now.

[bigskymma]

You know you are arguing like a BJJ white belt right? Not saying you are wrong but, that is actually who you sound like right now.

Yes. I sometimes get caught up in the nuisance of argumentation. I derailed the thread, my apologies.

Right or wrong, it has no affect on this actual thread. My apologies, I will attempt to be an actual productive member of MABS/Bullishido after this post =)

[Cy Q. Faunce]

Easy brother. Read my first post, I said if you made a counter-claim for malicious prosecution then it would be relevant.

On the one hand, I missed that.

On the other hand, you're still a fucking idiot.

Discovery motions tend to be granted even if they are extremely broad. Even a tenuous connection to a claim is sufficient.

Go read Jamie Zawinski's account of how a private Netscape.com mailing list for airing internal grievances got subpoenaed by Microsoft. What was the relevance to the lawsuit? Who knows? But the request was granted.

Or just shut the **** up.

[riki3]

Guys like this piss me off , I looked at some clips and read some of his claims,
No im not really impressed, must be good $$$ in spinning a yarn !!! the real victim is the student's.

[frogninja]

Guys like this piss me off , I looked at some clips and read some of his claims,
No im not really impressed, must be good $$$ in spinning a yarn !!! the real victim is the student's.

You nailed it right there!

[hungryjoe]

2010

Still claiming that his American Combat Kempo is used by the USMC.

He probably has a couple of jarheads paying him for his video distance learning classes.

http://www.carterhargrave.info/page8/page8.html

After training in four different styles in the same time in the early nineties, Hargrave started teaching as an assistant instructor. He noticed people were turning to martial arts schools in order to gain self defense skills, but were not finding what they would have needed. This is how the idea of American Combat Kempo was born. Hargrave followed this idea and now his style is recognized by many organizations and is used by the United States Marines.

And now, there is the Carter Hargrave Foundation

http://www.carterhargravefoundation.com/index.html

The Carter Hargrave Foundation is in infancy and will be growing rapidly to accommodate the charity and giving mission of helping others in unexpected ways.