Novak Loses petswarehouse.com, Files For Bankruptcy 303
An anonymous reader writes "Remember Robert Novak, the person who has filed several frivolous lawsuits in order to silence people who criticize his business. Well, Robert Novak has lost his domain (see here)in a countersuit filed against him, and has just filed for bankruptcy ."
I have one word for him... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I have one word for him... (Score:2)
That'll put marzipan in your pie-plate, Bingo!
Re:I have one word for him... (Score:5, Funny)
Petswarehouse.com sucks!
Come sue me, biznatch!
Heh (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Heh (Score:2, Funny)
Oh, you mean not just on Slashdot?
oops.
Re:Heh (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm under the impression that this isn't the first time he files for bankruptcy. I'm also under the impression that he doesn't care about his business, and that he'll find a way to sue some more people next week
What I'd like to know is: does he manage to profit from it? I'm not very knowledgeable of bankruptcy law, but is there a way he could be trading money for a bad credit history, in a way? Because if he manages and cares to do it again and again, he's probably not losing everything every time. Or maybe he's just hoping he'll get lucky?
Re:Heh (Score:5, Interesting)
It's actually not that hard. All you do is not own anything. Make sure that all your assets are actually owned by someone you trust (your SO, spouse, sibling, etc.). Then, you declare bankruptcy, and let the courts take everything you own (which is nothing).
Also, you live hand-to-mouth. When the money is rolling in, you buy expensive cars, live well, and lavish gifts on all people who are close to you. You don't save it, 'cause you know that the courts are going to take away your savings later. When the money stops rolling in, then you depend on your friends, SO, siblings for a while, as you dream up a new scam (business).
Basically, once you've accepted the fact that you aren't going to have good credit, then there is no fear of declaring bankruptcy.
For a certain kind of businessman, declaring bankruptcy is sort of like a fisherman deciding "All the fish here have been harvested, so it's time to pull up anchor and go somewhere else." In their minds, there's nothing immoral or embarrassing about it, it's just how they put food on the table.
The Down-side of bankruptcy (Score:2, Insightful)
A judge doesn't necessarily grant full protection from creditors if he/she determines, possibly from information provided which indicates spending it all and declaring bankruptcy was the plan all along, that this is
Re:Heh (Score:2)
So
Re:Heh (Score:2)
Except that, if a person is this shifty to begin with, how reliable can their family/friends be?
Re:Heh (Score:5, Informative)
From the web site:
On June 2, 3003 Robert Novak d/b/ Pets Warehouse and d/b/a petswarehouse.com filed for bankruptcy in the E.D.N.Y.
He is his company.
His personal credit won't be harmed, only the corporation's would.
I suspect his personal credit will be greatly harmed.
Re:Heh (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Heh (Score:3, Insightful)
The real question is how well has he protected his assets. F'rinstance, if his home were included in business assets he stands to lose it. Possibly any pending income from suing petsforum people could be transfered to creditors, too.
Re:Heh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Heh (Score:3, Funny)
Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:5, Funny)
When will this happen to the RIAA?
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's remarkably hard to take down a huge coporation without a similar budget.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, assuming that SCO dies [which is not by ANY means certain], it is signifigantly more accurate to say that their legal strategies are more of a dying gasp, instead of saying that their defeat [if they are, in fact, defeated] is a "deathblow".
In short, if SCO dies, it's because no-one bought their shit, not because they lost in court.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:2)
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:3, Funny)
That would takemore than alittle doing, I think.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd like to see some kind of penalty for filing frivolous/nuisance/totally-without-merit suits, preferably a monetary penalty (jail time might be going just a wee bit too far... though it would be very satisfying).
This should really go for all types of torts, including medical malpractice (disclaimer: I am a physician). I have multiple colleagues who have been sued, and NOT ONE of these suits had real merit, or were for any sort of egregious breach in the standard of care. How do I know? I've looked at the charts and thought "I wouldn't have done anything different." I could never testify against any of these physicians, because what they did was objectively medically reasonable. Now, they all won their cases, but some were very close... frighteningly close.
You always play the odds in medicine... and sometimes you lose. Every surgical procedure has a certain complication rate, no matter what you do. Every disease has a certain mortality rate, no matter what you do. The medical reality is that "sh*t happens," and it inevitably happens to a certain percentage of patients. It sucks to be in that small percentage, but attorneys and "hired gun" expert witnesses attempt to pin it on the doctor. The scariest thing of all is that you can lose everything you've ever worked for, just because "sh*t happens."
Tort reform is a good thing... trick is, you have to do it while not taking away the poor man's keys to the court room. Even so, if the poor man files a nonsense suit, he should find himself even poorer.
Seems fair to me...
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps some form of "3 strikes" approach? Small fine the first time, big fine the second time, jail time the third?
I mean, if it's just a fine, and they manage to pressure most into settling out of court, it's still financially sound for them.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:3, Interesting)
The question becomes this: What do we do? Are you going to "profile" all doctors because a few are bad? Do you justify punitive actions against the whole group because of a few bad apples? Of course not... to say that good doctors "deserve" the collateral lawsuits is not justifiable.
Doctors do police themselves to a degree... ask for the yearly minutes of any state's medical board, and look at the number of licenses they suspend/sanction/revo
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:2)
The state medical board is a panel of physicians, and they judge the fitness of their fellow physicians. I think this is the way to go... only another physician would have the necessary expertise. Police officers in use of force cases are judged by the standard of a "reasonable police officer," and I think a similar standard should be applied to physicians.
M&M is brut
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:2)
Hmmm... Let's not forget that you know that any mistake you make might not only devestate your practice and family, but end up killing someone and destroying their life and family.
I'm thankful that I'm not a doctor. Remember hearing that the average doctor finishes school by 30, gets out of debt by 40, retires at 50 and
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:2)
What you refer to is called "barratry", and it is in fact a crime in many areas, though I'm not sure where. Tort reform encompasses this and a variety of other problems. At the very least someone found to have engaged in this sort of behavior might be forced to pay his/her opponents' legal fees. New York does have an anti-SLAPP law, which could easily be used against Novak, but it probably won't be useful for
SLAPP (Score:2)
Each state's SLAPP laws are different. Some are only when you talk about the government process, others are much broader.
There is also rule 11, that may apply, which is for filing a frivilous lawsuit. This is not used much, but it does get invoked on occassion. There was a case in California where a plaintiff was hit with a $500k rule 11 ruling.
I'm not sure if the bankruptcy would discharge
Judge can award attorney's fees (Score:3, Interesting)
That being said:
At the discretion of the judge, based upon how frivolous the suit was, they can award attorney's fees.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:2)
Re:Have you seen the cover of TIME? (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem has not improved. With managed healthcare, not only is the risk high, but the potential earnings are down with extreme workloads.
This is one of the great reasons I went into electronics instead of the medical field. A failure is limited to replacement cost, not pain, suffering, potential income over lifetime etc. The pay is better for a surgeon, but the risk kept me out of the field.
So tell me, where is the next generation of doctors comming from?
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:2)
Your view in no way cooresponds to reality.
There absolutely should be a limit in damages, and it shouldn't be more than about $50,000, no matter what. Doctors DO make mistakes, because they are human. It's completely unreasonable to expect them to never make a mistake, especially considering that most medical cases are a total judgement call and not as cut and dry as you somehow imagine them.
Also consider that a huge percentage of medical malpractice cases are in fact frivolous. People (Americans) like
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:5, Informative)
I've made mistakes when treating patients... I've even watched treatments that I've prescribed kill patients (look up the complication rate for thrombolytic treatment for strokes, you'll see what I mean). I then had to face their family, and explain to them that the medicine they were gambling on to cure their relative's stroke had, in fact, caused her death. Bad outcome? Yes. Do you think I should be sued?
I would like nothing more than to be right all the time. Sometimes I just don't have the information I need (I work in the ER, and often have to go on little to NO information), and the patient suffers as a result. When a guy having a heart attack lies to me about his cocaine use, some of the drugs I'd normally use to treat his heart attack can harm, even kill him. What am I supposed to do? An attorney can go to court and argue that if I'd waited for his medical records to arrive, I would have seen the drug abuse in his old chart... but I have to treat RIGHT NOW, or I run the risk of breaching the 30 minute door-to-drug standard of care, and I can get sued for THAT. Hard choices.
I don't mind being between the devil and the deep blue sea... I signed up for that. What I cannot do is be perfect, or always have a perfect outcome.
The good news is this: most people understand... which is part of the reason that doctors prevail in 80-90% of all malpractice suits. Juries often "get it," despite the depredations of the personal injury bar.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:4, Interesting)
Malpractice insurance is very regional, and depends almost entirely on what state you practice in (Bad states include Florida, West Virginia, and others). It also depends on amount of coverage, and type of coverage (occurrence, versus "Claims-made"). Without getting into too much detail, my malpractice insurance as an ER doc is 35,000+ per year for average coverage, with no suits in my past. OB/GYNs have it even worse... some of them pay 100,000+ per year.
100,000K seems like a lot of money (and it is), but believe it or not, they're the lucky ones; some specialists, like neurosurgeons, can't even GET insurance. They have to "go bare" and try like hell to protect their assets, such that if they are sued, they don't end up broke and without a license... (kind of a kick in the teeth after 15 years of training).
I honestly don't know how much it would decrease the cost of medical care. So much of the cost of medical care is out of the control of physicians, and hidden from consumers, that it's extremely difficult to get accurate figures.
I always ask people if they are paying less for their healthcare than they used to, and they inevitably say they are paying more. And yet, physican incomes have actually dropped in recent years. Not kept pace with inflation, not stayed even... dropped. Where did the difference go? Some would say newer/more-expensive treatments, others would say treating the uninsured... I think part of the answer is administrative overhead. More HMO employees, more office staff to file claims, more people to refile those same claims after the insurance company's routine first denial (lather, rinse, repeat). Larger salaries for HMO CEOs... there's an enormous middleman in the health care industry, and I'm not sure malpractice savings wouldn't get added into the bottom line and reappear as a stock dividend.
Yikes... now I'm starting to sound like some of slashdot's anti-corporate anarchists.
I think tort reform would save substantial cash, not only in premiums, but in defensive medicine costs. I know some docs that do a CT scan on every headache, just so they don't get sued for missing that 1-in-a-million 18yo stroke victim, or the early brain tumor. It's horrendously expensive to practice medicine that way. Even so, I understand why they do it... it only takes one weird case to get scared. I've seen people walk into my ER with normal neurological exams, only slightly sleepy, with half their skull full of blood. Scary thing is, by most standards, you could easily justify not scanning that person... (I'm damned glad I did the scan). and that's just one example. I try not to practice defensively, but it can be hard when the patient threatens to sue you before you even find out their name, or they are on the phone with their lawyer from their ER bed (both true stories).
Does that sort of answer your question? I think it would help, and it would go well beyond simple premium savings.
Re:Live by the Lawsuit... (Score:3, Interesting)
What does Novak immediately do... attempt to dodge payment by declaring bankruptcy. If you look at the last page of the 7-page PDF file, there's John Benn listed amoung the creditors, and if you flip back to page 1, on the bottom the $50,001-$100,000 box is checked for the estimated debt.
Let's hope Johm persues this asshole further get gets a the court to impose a payment schedule so
And the doctor (Score:4, Insightful)
Do we see here proof that unethical corporate practices (sueing everyone) will eventually be the destruction of your business? I for one hope so.
Re:And the doctor (Score:2)
The less ethics you have, the larger legal department you have set up.
Re:And the doctor (Score:2)
last post (Score:2, Funny)
Learn from this one kids... (Score:4, Funny)
All I can say is... (Score:3, Interesting)
Cool...
Though, it's too bad that filing for bankruptcy doesn't mean that the frivolous lawsuits will end.
I don't think we've heard the last of Mr. Novak somehow.
Re:All I can say is... (Score:5, Funny)
We certainly haven't [cnn.com] unless we can get him to stop showing up on Crossfire [cnn.com] every other night.
Re:All I can say is... (Score:2)
This can't possibly be the same guy as the Bob Novak on Crossfire. Anybody have any evidence for or against this?
Re:All I can say is... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:All I can say is... (Score:2)
Oooooooh. I get a tingly feeling just thinking about it. After that, we'll go after Michael Savage.
Re:All I can say is... (Score:2)
Am we finally allowed... (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously. This was one of the more common reasons he would sue. People would order fish, aquarium plants, rodents, etc. and they would arrive dead, not marked for paid-for weekend delivery, sent at slower than safe shipping speeds, not packaged to protect from temperature and normal handling, or even not delivered to the carrier the same day they were packaged!!!
Re:Am we finally allowed... (Score:2)
Whats the Problem? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:But the OED.. (Score:2)
Re:Am we finally allowed... (Score:2)
Don't Fret... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Don't Fret... (Score:2)
Don't forget about petsovernight.com
THIS is the exception that proves the rule... (Score:2, Insightful)
Domain Will Be Auctioned (Score:2)
It's not clear to me why Mr. Novak can't just go out and buy his domain back on the open market. I can't imagine it is worth more than a couple of thousand dollars. And he shouldn't have any problems getting his hands on the cash since he in in bankruptcy protection.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Domain Will Be Auctioned (Score:2)
Re:Domain Will Be Auctioned (Score:2)
Now, with all the bad press associated with petswarehouse.com, i very much doubt it will have any commercial value, except maybe as an animal-pr0n site.
I'd laugh heartily if that turned out to be the case though.
Re:Domain Will Be Auctioned (Score:2)
That actually has no effect. The Canadian courts will enforce US judgements.
The fact the defendant is in the US makes matters even easier, the court can issue an injunction ordering Novak to hand over the domain. If he fails to comply he is in conte
Re:Domain Will Be Auctioned (Score:2)
Maybe because it's being sold in Alabama [petsforum.com]?
marketplace confusion... (Score:5, Informative)
It's been a nuisance that Novak and his pathetic activities has brought confusion via a similar name. Good riddance.
Ahhh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Novak 3 involves a lawsuit against Novak as the result of a defamatory message that was posted claiming a Bar Complaint was pending on November 2001 against John Benn. A judgment has been rendered against Novak in that case.
So he's going off suing people because they are (I assume rightfully) complaining about his poor business practices in a public forum. Then he publicly defamates a LAWYER'S character and loses the whole business!!! What an ultra maroon! It's big time poetic justice that Mr. Benn will get his $50,000 settlement from the obliteration of the brand.
Re:Ahhh... (Score:3, Informative)
He basically alleges that he lost tons of revenue and incurred damages to his brand because other companies that paid for advertising and ranking using keywords such as "pets" and "warehouse" unfairly got more hits/click throughs than his site. He sues the copanies that paid for the advertising AND the search engines like there was som
Well, it is true... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Well, it is illiterate (Score:2)
I want this domain! (Score:2, Interesting)
To quote nelson (Score:5, Funny)
Goodbye to bad rubbish (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't wait to see how the rest of this works out, with his other suits.
GuppyLog [guppylog.com]
Now if only... (Score:2, Insightful)
I hope that the bankruptcy court leaves him with the lifestyle of a crackfiend. I've known people whose business practices are like this guy's, and I have no sympathy.
just another tool of legal abuse (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't think for a minute that this means this guy is broke. He's likely just using the bankruptcy laws to shield himself from paying his obligation. The guy apparently abuses the legal system to sue everyone he can to make a buck, then when a law suit catches up with him he does this to not pay on the judgement against him. Pretty typical.
Re:just another tool of legal abuse (Score:2)
Reminds me of the Beatles lyric... (Score:2, Funny)
Methinks that Robert didn't make much in the way of love.
Karma baby....INSTANT karma if you will.
Well... (Score:4, Funny)
There are few people on this planet... (Score:2, Interesting)
Novak moved to a new domain. (Score:5, Informative)
Don't forget about his message board. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Novak moved to a new domain. (Score:2)
Re:Novak moved to a new domain. (Score:2)
uh oh! (Score:4, Interesting)
1550 Sunrise Hwy, Copiague, NY 11726
Phone: (631) 789-5400
I called, they're still open. The lady was kind of rude on the phone though. Anybody up for a class-action?
Def: Barratry (Score:5, Informative)
1. The offense of persistently instigating lawsuits, typically groundless ones.
2. An unlawful breach of duty on the part of a ship's master or crew resulting in injury to the ship's owner.
3. Sale or purchase of positions in church or state.
What he's doing is illegal, he should be fined into oblivion or sent up the river to be married to some guy named Bubba.
And, while we're at it, let's get the RIAA up on charges too.
-R
petswarehouse.com? (Score:3, Funny)
I think the self-storage business has gotten too specialized. First you could rent a storage area for your stuff, then your boat, then your car...
More (Score:2)
Good Riddance (Score:2)
He's one of those thousand lawyers who are a good start on the bottom of a lake, from that old lawyer joke.
[plus, two times in bankruptcy in 13 years?]
Anyone in Tuscumbia, Alabama? (Score:2)
Sounds just like another case.. Fatwallet.. (Score:2, Informative)
Some may remember the deal discussion forum Fatwallet.com from when several retailers sued them because users posted Black Friday sales fliers ahead of time. They also got sued by a guy named Todd Short, who was running a fraudulent scheme where he was selling laptops, claiming you would pay him now and get your laptop several months later. Users did, never got their laptops, and posted their experiences on the forum. The forum, along with a user who created a website, got sued by Todd. Later, he declar
Seriously good Psychiatry case write-up (Score:3, Interesting)
o Resist fulfilling their given responsibilities through procrastinating, "forgetting," sulking, or being argumentative
o Protest, without justification, that unreasonable demands are being placed on them
o Seem to work deliberately slowly or to do a bad job on tasks that they do not really want to do
o Obstruct the efforts of others and fail to do their share; are uncooperative
o Resent useful suggestions from others concerning how they might be more productive
What I am getting at is Novak's actions are the most extreme example of passive agressive behaviors I have ever heard of. Maybe he has a personality disorder is is Psychotic out of his mind. He is using the court system as part of his psychopathology. Because of the grand scale of this, his case could easily be published in a major Psychiatric journal. Is there any way to force him to undergo a Psych eval ???
Automatic Stay of Sheriff's Sale? (Score:2)
Re:HAH! :) (Score:2)
Why is this modded as troll? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Why is this modded as troll? (Score:2)
The same faith? The worship of the Almighty Dollar, perhaps? Nope, with ideas this screwy and the affinity for lawyers, they must be Scientologists...
Re:Trading animals should be made illegal worldwid (Score:3, Funny)
If the LORD didn't want us to eat animals then why did he make them out of Meat?
Re:Trading animals should be made illegal worldwid (Score:2)
If the LORD didn't want us to eat animals then why did he make them out of Meat?
Yeah, no kidding. They taste so nice...especially with barbecue sauce...
More to the point, if LORD is in all caps, it means Jehova, who commanded his people (Israel, through Moses) to eat animals. It's amazing what people will forget in order to try to make a point.
As long as we're off-topic... (Score:2)
And what, by the way, would everything be poised to doom? Society? The planet, maybe? Your cat? My proper digestion? Yeah, that's probably it.
Anyway, I doubt that the morality of our society is in much danger of being corrupted, given that we've never been particularly moral in the first place. Society's morale, on the other hand, may well be in danger. But I think that
Re:Trading animals should be made illegal worldwid (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Trading animals should be made illegal worldwid (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Trading animals should be made illegal worldwid (Score:3, Interesting)
Second, we need a clear definition of what is sentience. Let's toss out the PETA definition since using their rules would include insects and possibly even plants.
So what is sentience? My personal definition is the ability to ask a simple question, "why am I here". Note that the ability to answer this question is not necessary (humans have been arguing this point for a rather long time without success). Sentience is the ability to wonder about thin
Re:Trading animals should be made illegal worldwid (Score:2, Interesting)
What definition of sentience are you using? m-w.com says:
Animals aren't aware? Animals don't respond to sense impressions? More to the point, if
Re:Is it possible... (Score:3, Informative)
Sadly, I don't think so, it would probably hurt his rights to much. But maybe he could be fined for each abuse?
Random fact from my memory: I'm not sure, but I think in ancient Greece sue-happy people who lost their case got automatically banned from court after a few attempts, they could never sue again...
Re:Freedom of speech and so on.. (Score:2)