Love - MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY - MORRISSEY CENTRAL - Love
MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY on MORRISSEY CENTRAL

Regards,
FWD.
Related item:
- Morrissey's Prophetic Journal of the Plague Year - National Review - April 29, 2020
No it isn't. There are different stages, and it only becomes suing when it appears in a court. You have literally no idea what you are talking about. None. The reason I know this is because I'm married to a lawyer and I've just asked her. How about you bale out now?
An inch to the right of the far left is now perceived by morons to be right wing, so no the National Review hardly needs to perceive Morrissey as right wing to review his latest album. Is that clear enough for you?Obviously, perceived as right wing by the writer and the National Review. Do try to keep up.
No it isn't. There are different stages, and it only becomes suing when it appears in a court. You have literally no idea what you are talking about. None. The reason I know this is because I'm married to a lawyer and I've just asked her. How about you bale out now?
I LOVED IT.Love - MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY - MORRISSEY CENTRAL - Love
MESSAGES FROM MORRISSEY on MORRISSEY CENTRALwww.morrisseycentral.com
Regards,
FWD.
Related item:
- Morrissey's Prophetic Journal of the Plague Year - National Review - April 29, 2020
If Morrissey wasn't now perceived as right wing, would the National Review have written about his album? Doubtful.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!Yes actually. Their arts coverage has never been primarily about the politics of the creators, but about actual art.
I'm not sure you are 100% correct in this. I mean, far be it for me to question the greatest clinically Morrissey obsessed mind of modern times...No it isn't. There are different stages, and it only becomes suing when it appears in a court. You have literally no idea what you are talking about. None. The reason I know this is because I'm married to a lawyer and I've just asked her. How about you bale out now?
It's not only me. It's been in the press. It was even in one of his leaked emails.
"The reason I know this is because I'm married to a lawyer."No it isn't. There are different stages, and it only becomes suing when it appears in a court. You have literally no idea what you are talking about. None. The reason I know this is because I'm married to a lawyer and I've just asked her. How about you bale out now?
"The reason I know this is because I'm married to a lawyer."
You're both being careless with language. It's true that a lawsuit is only a "potential" lawsuit until it appears in court. It can be settled before it gets to that point. But "suing" is a verb and "lawsuit" is a noun. The process of "suing" begins before the matter makes it to court.
And Nerak isn't right either. A letter from a lawyer may be the beginning of "suing" but it doesn't constitute "suing" and it's definitely not "a lawsuit."
A letter from a lawyer can simply be a ploy meant to intimidate. Here is a real life example.
The New York Times on Tuesday said it would not retract or apologize for columns critical of Fox News host Sean Hannity's coverage of the coronavirus pandemic after Hannity's attorney threatened legal action against the newspaper.
"The columns are accurate, do not reasonably imply what you and Mr. Hannity allege they do, and constitute protected opinion," wrote Times's legal counsel David E. McCraw to Hannity attorney Charles Harder.
"In response to your request for an apology and retraction, our answer is 'no,' " the letter concludes.
You wrote "A letter from a lawyer is legal action, if it's about libel, he's suing."Cheek. I wasn't careless with language - it was saying what I wanted it to say, that Moz has used the law against the press on more than one occasion. And they don't like it.
You wrote "A letter from a lawyer is legal action, if it's about libel, he's suing."
A letter from a lawyer may be in regards to a potential legal action or it may be part of a legal action. If the letter is claiming libel you could call it an informal legal action but not in the sense that we usually mean by "legal action." It is "an action" and it's related to a "legal" matter but it's not a "legal action" in and of itself and it doesn't mean he is suing. It kind of depends what the letter says and whether there was any action taken after.
"Used the law" is also a slippery phrase to the point that no meaning can stick. But if you're going with "I was saying what I wanted to say" and the only person who has to understand your own private language is yourself then of course you're correct.
Everyone would know what I meant unless they were being bizarrely pedantic. The publication has had to accept that they would lose any court case & therefore they've apologised. He's effectively sued them & won at the first hurdle & everyone puts the best spin on it & moves on while hoping he does something indisputably awful they can get him for in the future.
It's the way of it.
You still haven't told us who he has sued multiple times.