click image to enlarge
Well folks, the Karma Patrol from the "SLAPP suit Refund House" visited the William Brennan Courthouse last Friday!
BAM!
On or about March 18, 2016, debtors Lane Bajardi and Kim Cardinal Bajardi, are to begin paying a six-figure judgment to one "John Doe" Defendant.
Judge Barry Sarkisian ordered Lane Bajardi to pay the MAXIMUM allowable salary-attachment: 25% of his disposable income, which equals $907.42 per bi-weekly paycheck, $1,814. 84/month, $21,778.08/ year.
Let's be clear, this wage execution is simply a reimbursement of legal fees and NOT DAMAGES.
Bajardi had opposed the garnishment motion, and submitted a certification to the court claiming that his weekly household expenses totaled $1,695.83, without attaching a single receipt, or proof. Bajardi also estimated additional "unexpected expenses" in the amount of $100/week.
The court appeared unsympathetic to Lane Bajardis' claimed weekly household expenses. For example, he claimed: $21.92 on "hair care for 3," $300 for "food," $69.23 for "household items," $34 for "Zip Car/Car sharing," $19.23 for "Lane and Kimberly clothing"- noting expenses to the penny without providing a single receipt.
It appeared to GA, who was in the courtroom, that Bajardi had prepared to testify on the wage garnishment, but balked at the sight of a reporter's video camera; John Heinis from Hudson County View, filmed the proceedings and published his article today.
 |
| Read the article |
Bajardi's 25% salary garnishment is not the first collection on the $276,677.00 judgment.
In January, a named-Defendant, Horse, was granted a writ of execution which froze the Bajardis' TD bank checking account and put their money in escrow. In February the court granted a release of their funds to attorney Alex Booth.
Today, Horsey revealed the amount: $4,223.75.
Note, the Bajardis filed a Notice of Appeal several months ago, but stopped the 'Appeal clock" with the filing of Appellate motions. Last week, the Appellate DENIED both of the Bajardis' motions, hence the 'clock' should resume ticking with the scheduling of briefs.
Which brings us to the present.
The email below is a peek behind the curtain at the "SLAPP suit disguised as a defamation case..." One man's "calling things as I see them" is another man's "attack" for which he seeks "damages... to send a message..."
Really?
There is no clearer description of abusing the courts to step on the First Amendment.
So based on these numbers Lane makes about $87,000/year. That's not a lot of money for a man with his level of experience.
ReplyDelete$87k net is about $130k gross. Radio doesn't pay unless you're Rush Limbaugh.
DeleteEspecially AM News Radio overnight shift
DeleteThink that's net income so it would be more like $130K plus all the fringe benefits of having Beth and Ricky pay for you and your unemployed wife's SLAPP-suit. Add a cool half-a-million.
ReplyDeleteBeth has spent quite a bit on political operations. This one of course being one of the longest and costly outside of her failed political "career."
We're preparing an emergency brown paperbag delivery downtown right now. Matty is out of town on a WWE wrestling excursion and FinBoy needs someone to make the drop.
There's nothing too dirty for us. After all, we even slimed Jen Giattino with Beth and Ricky financed mailers for Carmelo last election.
Always on call to serve, that's why they call us The Kreim Patrol.
None of them as they say are Boy Scouts.
ReplyDeleteWhat's Lanes weekly budget for Eyebrow threading and waxing?
ReplyDeleteSince Ricky doesn't have a Son, and he claims to be a liberal Democrat...why is he so involved in a anti-gay group like the Boy Scouts?
Delete$300 a week for food!!! what's he feeding the cow?
ReplyDelete$300 a week or $1200 a month? That's a whole lot of twinkies!
DeleteThe two biggest aholes that ever walked the earth.
ReplyDeletehow'z you feeling now, ya looney leprechaun, LOL!
ReplyDeleteSo...when will the suits for damages begin?
ReplyDeleteThe only think worse than Lane's Bad suits is This LAW Suit
ReplyDeleteIn 2010 Bajardi wanted to hire a "reputable" attorney. I guess he changed his mind in 2012. No reputable attorney would have taken this nonsense. Unless the plaintiffs lied their pants off and made misrepresentions of fact and damages. I understand the first lawyer dumped the case. They figured it out. the second guy who took this turd to trial should be held liable for malpractice. If the Bajardi couple has a penny left later, they can sue the trial attorney for malpractice.
ReplyDeletehas anyone seen lane and kim around? i haven't, wonder how they're taking it. do you think they're in denial? still feeling victimized? or has reality set in?
ReplyDeleteDunno
DeleteYes
Yes
No
If you look at the video, it's clear Lane Bajardi is not wearing a suit. He even wore a suit to his deposition right? So he clearly went in with a plan to "impress" the judge he has no money. It didn't work out because a) the judge was dumbfounded by the incompetent motion his side presented b) Lane didn't want to see that recorded by a news reporter with him begging the judge he has no money and can't pay for all the legal damages he's responsible c) he's going to look really small on the stand sitting next to the judge.
ReplyDeleteWell he's certainly big at something. He's a big dick and no, not the Mason guy.
There's your Napolean Complex in spades.