Please Tell Me I’m Wrong

Posted October 22nd, 2007 by Joe Kaiser

I wonder, because just over a year later, she's working as an Assistant Attorney General and sending letters to at least one Washington business making demands for millions.

Dear Rob,

You’re killing me.

Cheryl made $3,415 a month working for your office?

Good grief.


Who’s in charge here?

I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes at your office, Get Joe, Inc., and I can’t be sure former AAG Cheryl Kringle was in charge of anything.

But, with her taking the lead in my deposition and subsequent contacts with my attorneys, it’s clear she had a major role.

Monte Kline mentions her “shakedown” letter demanding a million dollars from him in the early stages of what would become the Pacific Health Centers fiasco, so I’m guessing Cheryl took a lead in that case as well.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I doubt it.


You Can’t be Serious

I did a little checking . . .

Cheryl was admitted to the Washington State Bar Association on June 6, 2002. Was she a lawyer in some other state prior to that, or did she actually have a whole ONE YEAR experience prior to handling million dollar investigations for your office?

One year?

You can’t be serious, Rob.

Just over a year after being admitted to the bar, she’s working as an Assistant Attorney General and sending letters to at least one Washington business making demands for millions?

Here’s how Monte tells it on his website . . .

On August 27, 2003 Assistant AG, Cheryl Kringle, sent me a “shakedown” letter charging that we were violating the Consumer Protection Act and demanding that we pay $1 million and stop doing Electrodermal Testing!

Unless . . . we stop doing Electrodermal Testing, they will file suit for up to $6,000,000!— Monte Kline
Pacific Health Centers

Maybe Cheryl had prior experience and wasn’t just some young, fresh out of law school lawyer trying to make a name for herself, but I doubt it, too.

Or maybe she was savvy beyond her years and even with little or no meaningful experience in the AG’s office was able to handle multi-million dollar cases on behalf of the state of Washington without breaking a sweat?

Ugh, no.


Right and Wrong

Or maybe she was exactly what I believe she was, a brand new attorney with a shiny law degree, determined to show everyone how tough she was by going after cases she knew that if successful, would make her the star AAG of the Consumer Protection Division.

And we tax payers paid a million dollars for her actions when your office ultimately lost its bogus Consumer Protection case against Monte Kline.

How could you let that happen, Rob?


Again?

And a better question . . .

How could you let a low-level AAG with zero meaningful experience take charge of the state’s multi-million dollar lawsuit?

And after having humiliated your office by bringing that wholly without merit Pacific Health Centers suit, how could you then let her do it yet again by suing me?

A low-level, little to no experience, naive, ambitious, arrogant, $42k a year AAG Cheryl Kringle, was time and time again allowed to put millions of tax payer dollars at risk by bringing meritless Consumer Protection lawsuits?

Duck!

In the arena,

Joe Kaiser


5 Responses to: “Please Tell Me I’m Wrong”

  1. DaveD responds:
    Posted: October 22nd, 2007 at 5:42 am

    You would think by now more level heads would have read the tea leaves, stop digging a deeper hole yet, and put an end to this nonsense! Where is someone like Fred Thompson of “Law and Order” when you need him?

    I can hear him now… “Here we sit at the table with an ace, 2,3,4, 6-high… and the other guy has five aces with more falling out of his sleeves… and we keep raising the pot?”

    Rob, you ain’t no Fred.

  2. DaveD responds:
    Posted: October 22nd, 2007 at 5:48 am

    Joe, I hope you’ve taken Monte out for a cup of coffee by now… scofflaws too want friends and need to stick together ;-)

  3. olyguy responds:
    Posted: October 22nd, 2007 at 1:47 pm

    …an attorney at $42K a year?

    wow. that is some kind of loser there.

    amazing. most anyone decent coming out of law school starts out almost double that. Here is some more info on Kringle.

    From this website: Lewis & Clark College in Portland OR
    http://www.lclark.edu/dept/chron/class2000ss06.html
    Cheryl Kringle J.D. ’01 is an assistant attorney general with the Washington state Attorney General Consumer Protection Division. She leads the senior and vulnerable consumer protection unit within the division and enforces the Consumer Protection Act through civil litigation.

    and I guess the AG’s office couldn’t stand her either since it appears that she left there for this firm: http://www.tousley.com/tbs/attydetail.php?id=24
    And their website provides this info:
    “Prior to becoming an Assistant Attorney General, Ms. Kringle practiced small-business and construction litigation in Vancouver, Washington.”

    The AG’s office should be embarrassed for having someone with that background handle the cases that she did. She clearly lacked ANY appropriate experience and clearly lacked competency, as indicated by her actions and her pay level. A good admin assistant get paid better than she did.

    Her big case was an art fake case where the people had already been indicted by the feds, had fled to China, and Cheryl, genius that she is, pursues the case, spending state money to test bogus art. News flash Cheryl-the art shop was already closed! The people had disappeared; you wasted our tax money pursuing a business that was already closed. Geez.

    Well, Google turns up enuf info that I don’t want to keep reading. Sadly enuf, these actions were pursued under the direction of our current governor. Which speaks volumes.

  4. Joe Kaiser responds:
    Posted: October 22nd, 2007 at 1:57 pm

    I’m sure she’s not a loser.

    She simply lost all objectivity in her obsession with misdirected consumer advocacy. Over-zealous advocacy is a problem in the law business and from my research, borders on code of conduct violation.

    Combine that with the power of the state, broad authority, laws to be liberally construed in her favor, performance based compension and advancement, and all the other BS that goes with the Consumer Protection Division folk, and it’s no wonder they believe the things they do.

    In any case, I’d say she’s walked a very thin line here.

    Joe

  5. spyboy responds:
    Posted: October 23rd, 2007 at 6:56 am

    Greetings,

    Joe says “I’m sure shes not a loser”. Well, at least in Monty’s case, she sure was not a winner.

    Thank You.
    SpyBoy


Post a Comment

Enter Your Details:


You may write the following basic XHTML Strict in your comments:
<a href="" title=""></a> · <acronym title=""></acronym> · <abbr title=""></abbr>
<blockquote cite=""></blockquote> · <code></code> · <strong></strong> · <em></em>

  • If you’re a first-time commenter, your response will be moderated.
  • If your response includes a link, it will require moderator approval.
Enter Your Comments:



Note: This is the end of the usable page. The image(s) below are preloaded for performance only.