As usual Geraldo has mis information. My source told me MD left the firm because he could not deal with his lazy partner. Also, MD did not take the bar exam in MS because he did not want to practice here he only wanted to lobby. This source also told me he actually did not apply to practice law in MS for those reasons.
I'd suggest that you check with your "source" again. According to information that turned up on Google last year MD didn't exactly have an exemplary record in Kentucky. Some legal insiders have speculated that he might have encountered a problem securing a Mississippi license even if he'd passed the bar. The "wanted to lobby" story sounds a little lame. It's sort of like telling everyone that you never obtained a private pilot's license because you didn't want to be a lunar astronaut. The fact that you're legally blind had nothing to do with the decision. Oh, one more thing, apparently Hanbury has a differing opinion over who was the lazy partner.
Maybe your source can answer this question--why did the original Hanbury and Dvorak web page assert that MD was an attorney, and would be offering his legal services to the Hattiesburg business community? That would certainly lead one to believe that he either already had, or intended to immediately obtain a license to practice law in Mississippi. Otherwise, he'd be breaking the law. Right?
Check the bandaid on your nose! Your information is wrong. You sound like Mader, anything you thing is a fact. Because one does hold a license in one state does not mean he/she cannot practice in another state under attorney's license. You need to get your facts straight. As far as the lazy partner who knows? I do not. But as an atorney who knows he parties your facts stink and are inaccurate.
Once again, as long as he's not in my bedroom (I don't know how to phonetically depict a gagging shudder) I don't care. Why does this garbage go on and on?? I'd rather know what's happened to all that salary money those yahoos were paid.
Also, apropos of the discussion about reading hard drives, I have it on V.G. A. that people were and is afraid to tell what they know. IF it is ok for the university to look at computers that it owns, why was it necessary to break into somebody's office at night to do so?
Geraldo: Check the bandaid on your nose! Your information is wrong. You sound like Mader, anything you thing is a fact. Because one does hold a license in one state does not mean he/she cannot practice in another state under attorney's license. You need to get your facts straight. As far as the lazy partner who knows? I do not. But as an atorney who knows he parties your facts stink and are inaccurate.
My credentials: B.A., University of Arizona, J.D. NYU College of Law. I'm licensed in California and New York. I'm also able to write a complete sentence and spell attorney correctly. I did not offer facts in the previous posts. I was very clear to report them as rumors and speculation, just as are your comments in rebuttal.
My credentials: B.A., University of Arizona, J.D. NYU College of Law. I'm licensed in California and New York. I'm also able to write a complete sentence and spell attorney correctly. I did not offer facts in the previous posts. I was very clear to report them as rumors and speculation, just as are your comments in rebuttal.
Geraldo, I think you're pulling an Angie and fudging a bit on your resume. According to my sources you graduated from the Brooklyn Law School, not NYU. Perhaps because they're both located in New York, you actually thought you were attending NYU? Or maybe you just think we're so unsophisticated that we don't know the difference down here. As for the rest of your Hattiesburg legal reporting, I'd say it's pretty close to the mark.