Robby Pilkington / Tonkasaw / Robi Vio - Failed pro-wrestler, failing IBS anchor, toughest guy on the internet

Purpose of stream?

  • "I'm not an Internet person and i'm done"

    Votes: 12 27.9%

  • "I'm going to keep streaming in some different way."

    Votes: 7 16.3%

  • Just a troll, not going to stream.

    Votes: 8 18.6%

  • Live suicide

    Votes: 16 37.2%
  • Total voters
    43
  • Poll closed .
6092CD71-D900-4324-9B71-BAF28638D98A.jpeg
Wikipedia’s some mark ass bitches.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Ma_Hooty, Mister Loser, The Caucasian Sensation and 21 others
How does he have ANY fans left, he keeps pulling the tough guy shtick even after backing out of the contract that didn't count because >I signed left handed

I don't think he can sue for breach for signing a fake name, you don't need to sign a real name for a contract to be legally enforceable only consideration needs to be exchanged.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Lysol
Bleachedanoos said:
How does he have ANY fans left, he keeps pulling the tough guy shtick even after backing out of the contract that didn't count because >I signed left handed

I don't think he can sue for breach for signing a fake name, you don't need to sign a real name for a contract to be legally enforceable only consideration needs to be exchanged.
Click to expand...

The breach would be never intending to follow through, demonstrated through:

Signing under a name he wasn't legally entitled to use
Providing falsified documentation purporting that a legal name change was pending at the last minute
A complete lack of travel arrangements
A failure to pursue most of the licensing process
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Pansexual doorknob, Lysol, Captain Manning and 3 others
I sent him this:

The doctrine of promissory estoppel prevents one party from withdrawing a promise made to a second party if the latter has reasonably relied on that promise.

A promise made without consideration is generally not enforceable. It is known as a bare or gratuitous promise. Thus, if a car salesman promises a potential buyer not to sell a certain car over the weekend, but does so, the promise cannot be enforced. But should the car salesman accept from the potential buyer even one penny in consideration for the promise, the promise will be enforceable in court by the potential buyer. Estoppel extends the court's purview even to cases where there is no consideration, though it is generally not a 'sword': not a basis on which to initiate a lawsuit.
 
  • Informative
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Ma_Hooty, OdoIslander, Kaiser Wilhelm's Ghost and 23 others
Null said:
I sent him this:

The doctrine of promissory estoppel prevents one party from withdrawing a promise made to a second party if the latter has reasonably relied on that promise.

A promise made without consideration is generally not enforceable. It is known as a bare or gratuitous promise. Thus, if a car salesman promises a potential buyer not to sell a certain car over the weekend, but does so, the promise cannot be enforced. But should the car salesman accept from the potential buyer even one penny in consideration for the promise, the promise will be enforceable in court by the potential buyer. Estoppel extends the court's purview even to cases where there is no consideration, though it is generally not a 'sword': not a basis on which to initiate a lawsuit.
Click to expand...

So essentially you let donga know how fucked he is?
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Pansexual doorknob, Lysol, Exterminatus and 1 other person
Null said:
I sent him this:

The doctrine of promissory estoppel prevents one party from withdrawing a promise made to a second party if the latter has reasonably relied on that promise.

A promise made without consideration is generally not enforceable. It is known as a bare or gratuitous promise. Thus, if a car salesman promises a potential buyer not to sell a certain car over the weekend, but does so, the promise cannot be enforced. But should the car salesman accept from the potential buyer even one penny in consideration for the promise, the promise will be enforceable in court by the potential buyer. Estoppel extends the court's purview even to cases where there is no consideration, though it is generally not a 'sword': not a basis on which to initiate a lawsuit.
Click to expand...

I was wondering what charges he may face if the documents he sent turn out to be false.

- Notary fraud?
- forgery?
- mail fraud?

- all of the above?

As a matter of fact, he did cause "reasonably foreseeable damages" with his little charade.
That'd be some serious federal charges coming his way.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: Lysol, Waves and not william stenchever
Buggins said:
I was wondering what charges he may face if the documents he sent turn out to be false.

- Notary fraud?
- forgery?
- mail fraud?

- all of the above?

As a matter of fact, he did cause "reasonably foreseeable damages" with his little charade.
That'd be some serious federal charges coming his way.
Click to expand...

Oh, I forgot about mail fraud!

Is a notary considered an officer of the court? That's a bit like police, courts take that shit seriously to protect their own
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Lysol
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back