Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Aspen Education Group
Pence v. Aspen Education Group, Inc.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---Aspen should put this on their web site. Not only did the pierces take a bath for the tuition but they couldn’t recover the lawyers’ fees. This is an incentive to never try to sue Aspen, that’s for sure. Aspen was being nice by not counter suing they could have probably taken away their house and retirement for harassing Northstar.
The Pierces lawyer should consider lowering his rate for them. Aspen will never take their child back into the program and I don’t blame them at this point after reading that, even though he needs help and the parents pissed away more money that could have gone towards further helping their child with this obviously ill advised law suit.
Matthew is the real loser here and I hope his parents can see clear to get him the help he needs as they move forward.
--- End quote ---
Who is "Pierce?" I spent a couple of hours copying and reformatting this document and the only mention of a "Pierce" that I've come across on this page, not to mention the past few days, is within your post. Are you drunk?
--- End quote ---
I havent read any names "Pierce" myself, either, in the copy you posted. The family name is Pence, I believe. Matthew Pence. No I am not drunk but you seem "High". I can go back and check for typos if you like, Ursus, you can go back to what you were doing.
Ursus:
Whooter, look: get a hold of yourself.
This was a request for a summary judgment brought by both parties. Legal wranglings, to be sure, but not the whole hog jury trial like you see on Perry Mason. We don't even know, unless someone else out there can vouch for this, whether or not Aspen may have settled out of court to prevent that happening.
The be-all end-all conclusion so-it-be-ordered was thus:
"Based on the foregoing, plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment [#38] is denied; defendants' motion for summary judgment [#48] is granted with respect to the first and second claims of the complaint, and otherwise denied."[/list]
To refresh your memory:
I. First Claim - Breach of Contract
II. Second Claim - IIED
III. Third Claim - Negligent Provision of Mental Health Tx
IV. Fourth Claim - Breach of Confidential Relationship
V. Fifth Claim - Punitive Damages[/list]
Defendant Aspen Education Group's motion for summary judgment on the first two claims was granted:
I. First Claim - Breach of Contract
"Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff's breach of contract claim."[/list]
II. Second Claim - IIED
"The court agrees with defendants that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law."[/list]
As far as the third, fourth, and fifth claims are concerned, those issues were still up for a jury's consideration, at least as of the creation of this document.
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---
--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---
--- Quote from: "Guest" ---Aspen should put this on their web site. Not only did the pierces take a bath for the tuition but they couldn’t recover the lawyers’ fees. This is an incentive to never try to sue Aspen, that’s for sure. Aspen was being nice by not counter suing they could have probably taken away their house and retirement for harassing Northstar.
The Pierces lawyer should consider lowering his rate for them. Aspen will never take their child back into the program and I don’t blame them at this point after reading that, even though he needs help and the parents pissed away more money that could have gone towards further helping their child with this obviously ill advised law suit.
Matthew is the real loser here and I hope his parents can see clear to get him the help he needs as they move forward.
--- End quote ---
Who is "Pierce?" I spent a couple of hours copying and reformatting this document and the only mention of a "Pierce" that I've come across on this page, not to mention the past few days, is within your post. Are you drunk?
--- End quote ---
I havent read any names "Pierce" myself, either, in the copy you posted. The family name is Pence, I believe. Matthew Pence. No I am not drunk but you seem "High". I can go back and check for typos if you like, Ursus, you can go back to what you were doing.
--- End quote ---
Quoted for sheer unbelievable insanity factor.
Ursus:
Summary Judgment:
"In law, a summary judgment is a determination made by a court without a full trial. Such a judgment may be issued as to the merits of an entire case, or of specific issues in that case."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment[/list]
Ursus:
Does anyone know how this case turned out?
As I mentioned previously, probably in one of the several other threads discussing this case, I was unable to find any further mention of it despite extensive searching. The case as it stands right now, i.e., what has been posted above in the OP, is a summary judgment requested by both parties in the hopes of foregoing a jury trial.
The judge ruled on two of the five claims. The remaining three (which include the HIPAA issues as well as punitive damages sought) are assumed to continue to a jury trial.
It's possible that this case is stashed in one of those pay-per-view or subscriber archives such as WestLaw. It's also possible that it hasn't come to trial yet. And it's also possible that Aspen may have offered some kind of settlement to prevent said damning issues from seeing any more light of day.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version