USADA - Armstrong

[Ninety5rpm]

Finally, if you want to get in touch with USADA General Counsel, we now have name, address and email:

William Bock, III
General Counsel
United States Anti-Doping Agency
555 Tech Center Drive, Suite 200
Colorado Springs CO 80919
wbock@usada.org

 

[Hugh Januss]

And...

He's asking for a jury!!!


WTF?

Is that even applicable to any of this?

 

[PedalPusher]

And...

He's asking for a jury!!!


WTF?

Of course he wants a jury! Then they can OJ it!

 

[Ninety5rpm]

Twitterer says that no TRO was filed with complaint.

Is this not a TRO request:

WHEREFORE, Mr. Armstrong seeks the following relief in this action
a. Temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against
Defendants USADA and Tygart staying the asserted requirement that Mr. Armstrong
elect, by July 14, 2012, or any other date, arbitration of the June 12, 2012 and June 28,
2012 charges, or accept the sanctions specified in those documents;

b. Temporary, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining
Defendants USADA and Tygart from imposing any sanction, or imposing any costs or
fines on Mr. Armstrong, or taking any action with respect to disqualification of competitive results, awards, titles, medals, or prizes held by Mr. Armstrong, based on the
allegations in the June 12, 2012 and June 28, 2012 letters;
(etc)

 

[superleicht]

I like the repeated mention of his business and contractual relationships with the UCI.

I'll be shocked if they don't get poured out.

Superleicht

 

[PedalPusher]

Twitterer says that no TRO was filed with complaint.

The complaint is asking for an injunction and declaratory relief and a jury if all else fails...LOL

 

[Ninety5rpm]

So, any predictions on how/when USADA and/or judge will respond?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Yes they will file counter claims. Interesting though, they have not cited any case law to defend their claim.

Because their only real avenue for that would be to cite precedent that on its face is counter to their assertions, and then have to try to explain how it doesn't apply...and my legal writing professor made sure he was clear about one thing, if all you have is precedent that works against you, find an argument that doesn't involve precedent...

I got through the jurisdiction portion and found it all over the place too. If the judge makes it past that, I will be surprised if he does, but maybe he wants to give the claims a fair look, then it looks to me like a hodpodge of arguments that (as has been pointed out, and is the reason no cases are cited) try to hide facts that the USADA can clearly point to as important for understanding the situation...I don't think the judge is going to like those 25 pages much more than the original 80.

I don't really feel like reading anymore because it makes me sick to my stomach. From everything I read, that motion is a loser just like the guy it is trying to protect.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I found NY to be a piece of cake.

I'm sure you're smarter than me...or is it I???

 

[El Oso]

First thing I read they are going for is a diversity issue...hmmmm, more on that later...


Okay, it's still a mess in legal logic, I guess they are trying to play on the judges ignorance of the governing bodies. It should be pretty easy to knock this out of the park.

trying to make a case that USADA didn't have a contract with Armstrong, BUT IF THEY did, then they broke their own rules...playing both sides...delving deeper....

Good catch! That didn't register with me. How could they come up with the amount in controversy. Probably a moot point though since federal question should take care of it.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Twitterer says that no TRO was filed with complaint.

If true, that is very interesting.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I'm multi-tasking.

Working on a corporations outline at the moment. Taking it in New York.

Good luck!! NY is a beast from what we are told. I am either going for the NC/SC double...or listen to my wife and a friend I have in school and take Hawaii...I may also go for a LL.M in tax instead of taking the bar right out of school. We'll see...

Sorry, sometimes I forget that most people want to hear positive things right before exams...me, I am driven by abject terror that I am going to fail...or even worse, get a C...So far I've avoided that horror...

 

[Cimacoppi49]

I'm sure you're smarter than me...or is it I???

I took the old Marino Josephson bar review with Joe Marino Sr. The guy hit all but one essay topic on the nose. The key to the multi-state is to answer by elimination with the understanding that the wrong answers are intentional deceptors.

It's "I."

 

[Race Radio]

There is no declaration from Lance Armstrong. Zip. Nada. Nil. None.

Last week I wrote the same thing but so far nobody has caught on as to why Lance is so scared to make any kind of sworn declaration. Given your knowledge of the law I am sure you can figure it out

Hint: Think Criminal

It isn't over

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I don't know why this line gives me such great joy, but...

Mr. Armstrong is a professional triathlete

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99740088/Lance-Armstrong-Amended-Complaint

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Sorry, sometimes I forget that most people want to hear positive things right before exams...me, I am driven by abject terror that I am going to fail...or even worse, get a C...So far I've avoided that horror...

I took the exam in the ballroom of the Statler across from Penn Station. I think it's now the Penta?? Each of us had a card table to work on. When they said to break the seal and begin, a guy two rows over threw up on his table. They very efficiently picked up the table, took it out, and gave him a new table with his vomit covered booklet. I always thought the dirty booklet was cruel.

Seriously, it's just one more exam. If you graduated from law school and took a bar review course, only you can defeat yourself.

 

[Warhawk]

Sorry, sometimes I forget that most people want to hear positive things right before exams...me, I am driven by abject terror that I am going to fail...or even worse, get a C...So far I've avoided that horror...

lol, no worries. I'm pretty laid back.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I took the old Marino Josephson bar review with Joe Marino Sr. The guy hit all but one essay topic on the nose. The key to the multi-state is to answer by elimination with the understanding that the wrong answers are intentional deceptors.

It's "I."

Honestly, my thinking is that my class ranking and the percentage passing suggests that if I just do the work, I will be fine. But I try not to let that thought enter my mind...I prefer the "You're going to fall flat on your face and fail the bar and end up holding a cardboard sign on the side of the highway" thoughts as a motivator.

I picked up on the "I" thing on second look, but I didn't want to pretend I hadn't tested positive for grammatical error before then...

 

[mksndz]

if lance wins this case, would doping in US cycling become, de facto, legal?

 

[Ninety5rpm]

I don't think the judge is going to like those 25 pages much more than the original 80.

Right. I didn't think they could come up with anything that the judge would like much better. My mistake was in assuming they would realize that and decide not to refile.

I hope he does the Rule 11 thing.

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Honestly, my thinking is that my class ranking and the percentage passing suggests that if I just do the work, I will be fine. But I try not to let that thought enter my mind...I prefer the "You're going to fall flat on your face and fail the bar and end up holding a cardboard sign on the side of the highway" thoughts as a motivator.

I picked up on the "I" thing on second look, but I didn't want to pretend I hadn't tested positive for grammatical error before then...

You'll be fine. Just don't forget to breathe during the exam.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I took the exam in the ballroom of the Statler across from Penn Station. I think it's now the Penta?? Each of us had a card table to work on. When they said to break the seal and begin, a guy two rows over threw up on his table. They very efficiently picked up the table, took it out, and gave him a new table with his vomit covered booklet. I always thought the dirty booklet was cruel.

Seriously, it's just one more exam. If you graduated from law school and took a bar review course, only you can defeat yourself.

Good to know, thanks for the confirmation on the review portion. I am figuring that I will do what I do every semester, and put in the work. I have never been this dedicated to anything in my life, so I am figuring I won't fumble the ball at the goal line...but I could throw up on my test and pass out too...

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Right. I didn't think they could come up with anything that the judge would like much better. My mistake was in assuming they would realize that and decide not to refile.

I hope he does the Section 8 thing (or whatever it is they violate for being frivolous).

My hope is that it will be fun to read the reason he kicks this out. My fear is that it will be an entertaining blistering to his attorneys that nevertheless allows the case to move forward...

 

[Cimacoppi49]

Good to know, thanks for the confirmation on the review portion. I am figuring that I will do what I do every semester, and put in the work. I have never been this dedicated to anything in my life, so I am figuring I won't fumble the ball at the goal line...but I could throw up on my test and pass out too...

My buddy and I would get up and study alone until 2pm. We would get together at 2:30 and study until 7pm every day but Friday. Friday night we would go out to a bar where the manager was my friend's fiance. We would drink for free after the first drink--I usually downed half a bottle or so of Hennessy. Would sleep until whenever I woke up on Saturday and just do nothing the rest of the day. Then Sunday would start the same study routine until Friday rolled around.

A serious tip. On test day, do NOT take review materials with you and stay away from anyone who has them and is still going over material. If ya don't know it by then, ya don't know it and there's no sense making yourself crazy to mess up what you do know.

 

[PedalPusher]

Good catch! That didn't register with me. How could they come up with the amount in controversy. Probably a moot point though since federal question should take care of it.

It's moot point, but interesting attempt. I can see where they get $75k, loss of earnings(sponsorships) being paid to race Tri's, etc...of course that is all speculative. But the diversity issue only holds if the judge buys into the jurisdiction argument. That USADA has no arbitration agreement with Armstrong through any means of any governing body.

Which I don't see how, because he allowed them to OOC test by his own pleading, and then he states that there was not any agreement prior to 2004? But then there was signatory agreement with UCI and USADA after 2004?

It's still a scatter-gun approach to his arguments, lets try this, but if that doesn't work, lets use this, which is fine, it happens sometimes, but in this case he has no supporting authorities in any of his arguments.