There was a Duke of York.
He had ten thousand men.
He marched them up he hill.
He marched them down again. (in Portugal in Napoleon’s time, as it happens).
The LNC is now following the Duke’s fine example. There was a motion that the LNC should join in the New Mexico ballot access lawsuit. It was on its way to passing, but the LNC has now turned around an in light of new events is reversing their stand with votes changing to reject the motion. Two reliable sources assert that the planned pro bono attorney withdrew from the case because there were excessive negative interactions between the attorney and two members of the LNC. We do not have a direct confirmation that attorney withdrawal is the explanation.
An email from the R1 Rep went out asking why a lawsuit is being authorized when a cease and desist letter was never sent to the New Mexico Secretary of State. Such a letter would be expected before going to a lawsuit. This all seems a little strange.
Such a letter shouldn’t be sent without a lawyer ready to file a lawsuit, otherwise the sender loses credibility.
There are two different legal issues. One has to do with ballot access. The other has to do with trademark. Oliver Hall was going to handle the ballot access case which is what this is about which will have tangential relationship to the trademark issue. Clearing up the trademark issue would help the ballot access issue. The LNC has trademark counsel. Whether or not they have funds to pay them is another issue but there was never pro bono representation on trademark which is a speciality that Hall does not handle. Further, trademark is a Federal case issue, and I believe (though could be mistaken), the ballot access issue was going to be a state court case.
And yes, it is credible and responsible to send a trademark cease and desist immediately. In fact, it can prejudice a future case if you don’t – the timelier the better. You apparently do not know much about trademark law. I am not an attorney, but I do know that. Too many opinions and too little knowledge on this issue, and mine is minimal and still more than most fellow laypersons.
Hope that helps.
Sounds like Chadderdon and Martin bullied the attorney so much he resigned as counsel. Will they learn their lesson? Probably not. Kick them off the LNC for gross negligence and aggravated bullying.
Some background on this case would be helpful…
If you search “New Mexico” in the search function you’ll find all the articles here, which will probably provide enough background for a start. There’s probably more over at IPW.
The group that was mutually disaffiliated (they disaffiliated themselves and the LNC disaffialated them) is back to actively the trademark after leaving for the Liberal Party. The LNC has a different recognized affiliate. That is what the cease and desist was about.
The Oliver Hall pro bono issue was about ballot access issues. The two are related but not the same but having the trademark issue settled would make the ballot access case less convoluted, at least I believe that is the thought though I am not privy to the LNC’s current thoughts on the issue. I am not so sure I agree but I cannot discuss more at the risk of inadvertently saying anything I learned before I resigned, which would be confidential.