Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The joke has gone over my head as well..

The family’s lawsuit is the joke.

Time for the parents to pursue a new and different scam:

https://www.bbb.org/new-york-city/get-consumer-help/articles/the-nigerian-prince-old-scam-new-twist

LOL. I feel sorry for the daughter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP but it is a real distinction that goes to the merits. Don't pretend otherwise.

The law suit had no merits! Three strikes and the plaintiffs are out. Time for them to let it go, or more likely, find a new scam.

Exactly! Practicing lawyer here. No one is awarded costs, fees, etc. unless the suit is frivolous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The joke has gone over my head as well..

The family’s lawsuit is the joke.

Time for the parents to pursue a new and different scam:

https://www.bbb.org/new-york-city/get-consumer-help/articles/the-nigerian-prince-old-scam-new-twist

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The joke has gone over my head as well..

The family’s lawsuit is the joke.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is false. The family did not pay sidwell fees. You people will go so far to disparage a family. No wonder people do not speak up.

Here's the link to the DC Superior Court e-access system, if you want it: https://eaccess.dccourts.gov/eaccess/search.page.3.2?x=HGD3Ublw3CoRtM8j3lZRlXk1PFPVd6P-N4Z4QVy66LhV-jsQhEAKTMG4zmgWt0vdvLYXs5ur2YugTApDxrA-jYZkl3iWULunlAJIEdorXyYwoGZoci7KhrAGlJaxILVyXfdEQ2Bgy37LZ2KCTDDEzUMcd4nk0Aw59XjF8ulhQMw. Should that fail, go to [url]https://eaccess.dccourts.gov [/url ]and search for the name Titilayo Adetu. On January 23, 2019 the appeals court upheld the trial court order which granted Sidwell $37,834.58 in costs.

I looked it up and you lied. The $37,834.58 was to cover the cost of recording the precedings at the request of the parties.

From Memorandum Opinion and Judgment Affirming the Grant of Summary Judgment in favor of Sidwell Friends School and Affirming the Bill of Costs in the amount of $37,834.58: "The Adetus also failed to establish that the trial court abused its discretion in granting Sidwell's bill of costs in the amount of $37,834.58. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment and bill of costs" (1). Later: "Sidwell subsequently filed for a bill of costs, and after a hearing, the trial court determined almost all of the requested costs reasonable and necessary and granted costs to Sidwell in the amount of $37,834.58" (4). Throughout the document, only the phrase "bill of costs" is used.

Alleging that this amount pertains to the cost of recording is awfully specific, and the actual bill of costs is not one of the documents available through CourtView system. If the Adetus have not paid this amount to Sidwell, it's only because the case has been under appeal.

Anyway, interesting that you're investing so much in trying to discredit this point. Also interesting that you seem to know something that is not viewable in the public documents. Care to share a link?

[b]So you agree bill of cost is not the legal fee?

[/b]


NO! Costs = legal fees. The costs Sidwell suffered by defending this frivolous suit.
LEGAL COSTS | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/legal-costs
legal costs. noun [ plural ] uk ? us ? also legal expenses LAW. the money that helps pay for the lawyers and the court in a legal case, usually paid by the person or organization that has lost the case: The company had to pay €138,000 in legal costs, after it admitted violating safety codes at two of its factories.