Official Response of SBT

I would remind guests that Blue MauMau has posting guidelines; specifically: 

[The use of] strong personal accusations without any evidence against individuals  will be removed. Please do not use words such as Mr. or Ms. X is a crook, felon, drug addict, or adulteress, etc. to describe an individual without the strongest of evidence.

In other words, if you say someone is a "crook" then you had better link to court documents showing that they've done time. There are a couple of general rules for publishing. Falsely accusing someone has done time risks charges of defamation to the poster. Crook is one of those magical words that gets people in legal trouble. For reasons of arcane laws in various states, challenging the chastity of a woman is the other that can land people into legal trouble. Crazy, huh?

There are exceptions. Sarcasm and hyperbole come to mind. These two concepts are greatly appreciated in this country.

e.g. "He said this and that? What a crook!" 

The guest's comment, "John, you are an idiot", has such an example.

That brings us to the word "idiot". Although such words are a little too crass and troll-like for us blue-bloods, posters can use such venomous verbiage. After all, it probably describes many of us at certain points of our lives. But it should be said that calling someone an "idiot" just does not fit well with the Blue MauMau community culture. We aspire to argue in a gentlemanly or lady-like fashion on issues. We avoid personal labels. Rather than say someone is a crook, we like to lead the reader to such a conclusion.

e.g. Mr. Vendor says this. But such conduct has landed people in jail, as in the case of X (link to the case).

Mr. Blue MauMau
Moderator

I would think that the modular and kiosk invoices should say MBM that is who were supposed to build them unless they merged the companies and never told anyone. Plus the invoices just told how much is actually paid for the buildings which was $29,699 times 2 = $59, 398 and is that not sad since they sell the 10 x 26  for $169,900 or more now. Plus what they charge for inlines (depending on how large) people can see how much it actually cost Elite and how much they made themselves there.

I have not seen any of the documents re DN's involvement with the Cuppy's group. However, there are some things that are so obviously critical in his involvement that we have to assume he did this correctly. Otherwise he has set himself up to be chump of the month.

He had to have arranged to avoid any possibility of personal responsibility for any past acts and transactions, including extant liabilities accrued or accruing from them.

Whatever was signed was signed by a thinly capitalized corporation that he owns/controls, with disclaimers aplenty.

If anything good comes of it, he will reap a reward. If it goes in the tank, he has no personal risk. None that is unless he engages in some wrongdoing for which he would have personal liability.

What these other people do probably can't affect him, except that they may do things that prevent his reaping the hoped for rewards.

If there is any other scenario at play here, DN was sorely under represented.--

Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com,  has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School

Guest, you might want start reading.

1.  The lawsuit against Elite claims that Fransynergy is the 100% member of the Elite LLC, which pretty much makes Dale Nabors, in the vernacular, the President of Elite.

2.  The alleged representation of Rob Folk of SBT is meaningless in the context.  John was there from SBT and Rob was there from Elite.  No big deal, exactly what you would expect from a new company, SBT, and its main customer, Elite.

John is asserting that Elite hasn't paid its bills.  

How are these other issues relevant, especially when your assertion appears incorrect on its face?

Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News

Perhaps I can help Mr. Webster.

Since SBT finds my post "defamatory," I take it that we will be commencing discovery shortly after I get their suit for defamation. Nothing like a juicy deposition (or 2 or 3 or as many as it takes) to bring some clarity into the dark crevices of the Cuppy's Coffee labyrinth.

Since SBT assures us there is nothing fishy, let us believe for a moment that some of my observations about factual errors in the pleading can be ascribed to crappy lawyering by SBT.

Still, the fact remains that SBT did not answer the specific questions raised in my post about the formation of SBT, the odd "Exhibit D", and the curious timing of the suit.

There is a long history of Morgan and his business dealings, and a pattern which is familiar to anyone with knowledge of that history.

I've had my issues with Mr. Nabors, but given a Hobson's choice in an integrity contest my money would be on Nabors' veracity as against the gang that brought us the Elite/SBT marriage.

Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400