Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    David Nice's Avatar
    David Nice Guest

    Default NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    http://www.nahi.org/Motion-Filed-Copy.pdf

    It appears that the ink has not even dried on the settlement agreement between NAHI and NACHI and NAHI has already purported to the court that NACHI is in violation.

    After reading the motion and noting my own name showing up and some of my message board posts quoted, I can see how consumed they are by being talked about in a negative way by anyone. They have been dishing it out left and right but when the shoe is on the other foot they want to cry foul (and do so at NAHI members expense).

    They have littered this latest motion with so much BS that has nothing to do with the basis of their motion to somehow obscure the facts and take yet another opportunity to repeat their original bogus claims.

    They themselves indicated in the motion that Nick Gromicko is the "sole director/owner of" The National Association of Certified Home Inspectors, Inc." NACHI is not a member run organization.

    Nick was not acting in bad faith to answer questions about who was party to the agreement. If he had actually stated (on the record) that it would take time for members to come on board with the new name and logo, there is no way in God's little green earth that the statement indicated that members were a party to the agreement.

    Obviously as NACHI begins to use its new logo and name, members will want to signify their membership by using them. There was nothing ambiguous about NACHI's agreement to (over two years) to begin to change over it's market materials to use the new name and logo. What NAHI wishes is that the agreement was going to somehow be enforceable to roughly 10,000 members, chapters and licensees.

    Take private companies that were licensed to use NACHI in their name (such as NACHI Certified Education, The NACHI Store, NACHIStuff, independent chartered chapters and members).

    Q: How can Nick and NACHI enter into agreements on their behalf?

    A: They cannot.

    As sole director/owner, Nick can only enter into a settlement on behalf of the corporation to which he is a the "director" of.

    One can only hope that the new logo, and brand name takes hold among those organizations as well as members.

    Did they think that all the publications inventoried all over the country with the NACHI name would be burned in the town square?

    They wanted to have the agreement include censoring the NACHI message board and as part of the settlement agreement, that was not going to happen.

    If Mallory, NAHI and their attorneys feel that people making fun of them is offensive and a judge should intervene, let's roll the clock back and include everything any NAHI member has said to make fun of Nick, NACHI and it's members for years.

    I am betting that the judge will see through this thinly veiled attempt to put more BS for their members consumption to try to justify the continued wasteful spending of members hard earned money. It is pretty expensive entertainment reading.

    They might want to save some money to help defend their PA chapter and some of the members their for trying to destroy NACHI members businesses by falsely claiming that NACHI members could not legally do inspections in PA.

    Mallory and company. Try as you might, getting a judge to enforce things that are not part of the settlement agreement is a huge pill to get him to swallow. But you and your lawyers already know that.

    "Clinton St. Greater Bethlehem Church v. City of Detroit, 484 F.2d 185, 189 (6th Cir. 1973). Summary enforcement of a settlement agreement for which there is no dispute as to the terms of the agreement is the only appropriate judicial response, absent proof of fraud or duress".

    Just the basis of your motion indicates that there apparently is a dispute as to the terms.

    Jaynes v. Austin, 20 Fed. Appx. 421, 427 (6th Cir. 2001) -
    "However, to award attorney fees under a court‟s “inherent powers” requires “a finding that an attorney „willfully-abuse[d] judicial processes by conduct tantamount to bad faith.‟

    "...oral settlement agreements on the record are enforceable when entered into, even if the parties agree to later memorialize the agreement in writing." Aro Corporation, 531 F.2d at 1374.

    The odd thing is that you use an "off the record" agreement to get a new logo onto the website quickly as the basis for part of your claim that NACHI is in violation (of that off the record agreement).

    I would like to go on shredding this motion but I just don't like reading fiction

    Quote me in your next motion, puleeese!

    Similar Threads:
    Elite MGA Home Inspector E&O Insurance

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Spring Hill (Nashville), TN
    Posts
    5,829

    Default Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Kind of a Tit for Tat!. I hope that this is settled by the judge. It is getting kind of old. Just imagine all of the expense to defend an action like this. Ole Bushart might need to pass the hat for donations to fund the defence. According to Nick it cost over $200,000 to defend and finally settle the last one.

    Scott Patterson, ACI
    Spring Hill, TN
    www.traceinspections.com

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    25,313

    Default Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Patterson View Post
    Ole Bushart might need to pass the hat for donations to fund the defence. According to Nick it cost over $200,000 to defend and finally settle the last one.
    What about the aforementioned Mr. Nice?

    He is specifically named, maybe he will need to pass the hat to pay for his legal defense. After all, *he did* volunteer to step forward and stepped into it.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

  4. #4
    Deleted Account's Avatar
    Deleted Account Guest

    Wink Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Patterson View Post
    Ole Bushart might need to pass the hat for donations to fund the defence. According to Nick it cost over $200,000 to defend and finally settle the last one.


    Do you really think that some judge is going to suspend free speech because Mallory's panties are in a knot over her leaked fubar'd deposition? Scott, pass the bong, snap out of it. Besides if it ever really got serious, which organization do you think could raise a few million dollars in the wink of an eye?


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Spring Hill (Nashville), TN
    Posts
    5,829

    Default Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson View Post
    Besides if it ever really got serious, which organization do you think could raise a few million dollars in the wink of an eye?
    I don't think any of them would be able to do that. I don't really see Nick putting any of his inheritance into the kitty either, he enjoys the nice lifestyle too much.

    Scott Patterson, ACI
    Spring Hill, TN
    www.traceinspections.com

  6. #6
    David Nice's Avatar
    David Nice Guest

    Default Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Peck View Post
    What about the aforementioned Mr. Nice?

    He is specifically named, maybe he will need to pass the hat to pay for his legal defense. After all, *he did* volunteer to step forward and stepped into it.
    I'm no lawyer but one of my old lawyer friends who was my mentor for years, assured me that I could pass the bar in Mississippi and I'm not easily intimidated.

    It is not often that one sees quite such a wanton attempt to intimidate NACHI members and use our statements to obscure the fact that they are again out of gas. This motion is an incredulous compilation of grasping at straws and misinterpretation of case law.

    These lawyers obviously know that if they cannot dazzle the court with brilliance, they might as well baffle them with BS. These guys don't give a hoot.They will be getting paid no matter what the result so why not try yet another crap shoot.

    I'm sure that the judge will easily be able to edit out all the irrelevant nonsense that is primarily for dramatic effect. It is a tough one to get injunctive relief when they don't seem to understand the implications of the settlement agreement they entered into.

    Obviously Mallory, the leadership and their lawyers are into the drama or they wouldn't be scouring the NACHI message board trolling for NACHI member statements or any tidbits to show what victims they are.

    Tell that to the NACHI members in PA. Now that is a slam dunk case (if ever there was one and probably only the tip of the iceberg.

    I know your not stupid Jerry. As much as you might feel the need to toe some sort of party line, I am sure you can see through a lot of this nonsense, right down to the original lawsuit that appeared to have been settled. It is pretty clear that a dispute is developing over the specifics of the agreement. It is, what it is, and it is not what it is not. The judge is likely to notice that. Perhaps he an give them a hint.

    Last edited by David Nice; 08-02-2007 at 11:20 PM.

  7. #7
    David Nice's Avatar
    David Nice Guest

    Default Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Patterson View Post
    Kind of a Tit for Tat!. I hope that this is settled by the judge. It is getting kind of old. Just imagine all of the expense to defend an action like this.
    It was old before it even got started. The whole premise that NAHI was hurt because the public confused NACHI with NAHI is some sort of sick joke. The logos look nothing alike and the word certified is used with great abandon in most all of NACHI's publicity.

    If this went to trial it would take a lot of fabricated evidence to convince a court of tha and there is plenty of evidence that any losses suffered by NAHI since NACHI came about can be attributed to many other factors.

    An agreement for NACHI to roll over into a new name over a period of 2 years was a good deal for them and was a direction that Nick had been kicking around for over 4 years now. To expect that members would by default be legally party to the agreement is a failure on their part to understand the specifics of the agreement. NACHI is not a member run organization, we don't vote for a board of directors. From the words in their own motion they seemed to understand that.

    NAHI agreed that NACHI did not have to censor the NACHI message board and Nick agreed not to make dispairaging remarks while refering to them by using the NAHI acronym or the name of the National Association of Home Inspectors. He has followed that agreement to the letter.

    They should kick their own lawyers over the distribution of the Mallory deposition for failing to get a protective order on it. They could have done that.

    The idea that they felt the need to cite individual NACHI members statements and opinions to somehow indication that NACHI, Inc. and Nick are not complying with the agreement is an abuse of the legal process and a blatant attempt to intimidate us.

    Geese, if someone wanted to file motion that included all of the things NAHI members have said negatively about NACHI and it's members over the years we wouldn't have any trees left.

    I do hope that the judge helps them understand the meaning of the specifics and technicalities of the settlement they agreed to. One has to be very specific and referring to the "spirit of the agreement" better be based on sound legal principle and not wishful thinking. Perhaps then they will figure out what kind of attorneys they have.

    One thing they don't want is to have the agreement thrown out due to a dispute and go to trial. There implication to their members that NACHI blinked would be proven false and I'm betting it would be goodbye Mallory and a good number of board members. Of course that might happen anyway.


  8. #8
    David Nice's Avatar
    David Nice Guest

    Exclamation Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Burkeson View Post
    Do you really think that some judge is going to suspend free speech because Mallory's panties are in a knot over her leaked fubar'd deposition?
    Bottom line is that the NAHI attorneys failed to get a protective order on the Mallory deposition. Surely they had to know that with such a contentious case that it was a no-brainer to see that this stuff remained confidential. What amateurs.


  9. #9
    Deleted Account's Avatar
    Deleted Account Guest

    Default Re: NAHI files another motion against NACHI

    Quote Originally Posted by David Nice View Post
    I know your not stupid Jerry. As much as you might feel the need to toe some sort of party line, I am sure you can see through a lot of this nonsense, right down to the original lawsuit that appeared to have been settled.


    Today the only political line which Jerry is a party to is a failed memory of what might have been. Believe me when I say that NAHI does not consult with Jerry Peck prior to acting and NACHI & ASHI have long ago dismissed his leadership ability. If you come across Jerry acting in a political manner rest assured it is merely a feeble attempt to settle some old score.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •