|
a fuller summary of the first half of the events is at animenewsnetwork. presumably everyone else will notice soon. unless you read lawtwitter regularly, but let's keep it briefer going to provide a quick summary of events since last week that took this case from "nonsense defamation demanding anti-slapp" to "well he used to be a lawyer". standard disclaimer: not a lawyer, going off of memory for the dumbest things, it's been chaotic so there's more than these gems that others have noted, copy this into op or that idc preface: this case has been going on for a while, to the point that Ty Beard, presumed layer of Vic, got a month extension to respond to the anti-slapp filings. this extension gave him until august 30th to file a motion to strike. aka. "provide evidence that anti-slapp isn't relevant specifically for every point of claim". every point they didn't answer goes through, there's high standards for this, law twitter figured a couple would make it past it even given Beard's history timeline via: Beard: Motion to Leave 08/31 12:00am: nothing appears on the docket, defending party counsel starts asking questions. (gather it isn't a great sign if they presume you won't hit a deadline after an extension so stayed up to detail it all) 08/31 12:08am: defending counsel Lemoine emails Beard, states they're late and they'll move to strike if anything is filed 08/31 12:10am: plaintiff counsel Bullock emails Lemione, mentions technical difficulties efiling due to file size, not our fault, sweet dreams 08/31 12:17am: plaintiff counsel Bullock emails Lemione, forwarding submisison failure email. has Date/Time Submitted as 8/31/2019 12:15AM CST. Reason: Secured by security restrictions, please remove password protection and resubmit. 08/31 12:27am: The Filing is filed at the court chaos reigns. the resposne is 37MB and insanely bad. i mean every lawyer involved had lowered expectations and this managed to missed that bar. lawyer thread ripping it apart: https://twitter.com/fsckemall/status/1168036821651087361 Wednesday: at this point everyone has fun over the long weekend and notes a couple of Unusual Issues as has been mentioned before. namely the 3 notarised affidavits dated 08/30 - the day it should have been filed. as a quick explanation of an affidavit: file out a document explaining a situation, lawyer check it over to clean up wording, you all agree on the contents. then you sign it and (normally) a third-party notary stamps it to assert that the person signing a) is who they said they are, b) read the document, c) was there at the time the 3 people's listed residences are: 125, 141 and 454 miles from Beard's office, but they all appeared before him and it got signed and stamped that day. Beard was in his office the entire time and very public about it, but Slatosch was at a convention in San Antonio that day - 5h drive one-way no one's buying it to the point that denfending counsel file a joint response to The Filing. it's a quick read with in-line images for all of the fuckups. sanctions are mentioned and Friday 10am looks like it'll be more about Beard's license than the TCPA really then the real storm happens The Filing is being superseded by a Secondary Filing that looks to have more of the footnotes complete, but the affidavits are gone. instead they're replaced with identical documents as declarations with the notary stamps gone. strange Thursday: everyone starts to refocus on the declarations as filings appear by the dozen. there was artefacting around the signatures to start with, but given the amount of times the document was processed no one dug into it. then it became apparent they weren't the same as the original filing, but are oddly similar top: unsworn declaration, bottom: affidavit Beard notarised https://twitter.com/levi2150/status/1169678496924393473 https://twitter.com/TheBrownFolder/status/1169700666786353152 current theory is full legal name required for the notarised signature. but where did the rest of the signature come from? meet the BlackJack font https://twitter.com/TheBrownFolder/status/1169706100465291267 Oh. things then get stranger as a new lawyer appears on Vic's side. theories abound: are they there to defend the firm from Beard? strange their background is guns and family law, not defamation or anything to do with a conflict counsel. and then the defending counsel requests a subpoena for Vic to attend the hearing today (Friday 10am). then the plaintiff attempts to quash it, no formal response yet, will he appear? now i have an hour to catch up to yesterday's events before the hearing starts. lawtwitter is trying to make sure the transcript is public by the weekend as well. this post would be a lot cleaner if i wasn't condensing a week of insanity in half an hour as noted the filings are generally held here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/15oy4VANDr2UMN15dvlfqiM_1Qob3Jpc4
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Maera Sior posted:Turns out that isn't true in Texas, but I can't dig through that many tweets to find the one Texas lawyer post. a slide that may appear in the court: 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
so i had checked the hearing calendar for the courthouse to get an idea of how long this could go on: https://www.tarrantcounty.com/content/dam/main/civil-courts/DistrictCourts/Dockets/141st-CDC-Dockets/141hearc.htmquote:
https://twitter.com/HerExcell/status/1169982752600612868
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:I feel like Vic stans think Phoenix Wright is a documentary https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169989789506035714 i'm hoping papers for a federal case are served immediately and no objections to the press being there, very common for a private figure in a pre-trial hearing
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
oh dear https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169991257038426113 https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169991626342768640
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
the judge may not be in a good mood right now e: it begins https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169993396494184454 Wiggly Wayne DDS fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Sep 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1169998709851119617 re: transcripts: https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1170000140389801984 Wiggly Wayne DDS fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Sep 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 16:40
|
|
|
all according to plan https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170000274485915650 https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170000351031910400 https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170000817551749121
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 16:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170003412295081985 https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170003687340683264
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 17:00
|
|
|
the actual transcript is going to be an amazing read, i've got the tweets in a more legible form just awaiting a large break or that to dump them
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
@ottovonbisbark was the lucky person to be in the court with a bar card so that's where all the live tweets are from. unfortunately the threading didn't happen (they're all replies to the first tweet) so here's a slightly cleaned up version until the actual transcript appears (a few irrelevant tweets weren't included, emojis dropped) 10:00am: Judge is here. 10:02am: Debating which MTD to hear first 10:03am: No objections to the press presence 10:04am: Nick walked in! 10:06am: Volney arguing motion to strike 2nd amended pet. Relying on Rule 11. 10:07am: He’s arguing that they messed up the response to the MTD so they dropped the 2nd amended pet. Volney has a bench brief on rule 59 10:08am: Can’t back door in the improper affidavits with petitions he said 10:09am: Judge: is this a response to the MTD? P: no. Judge: then I’m not going to consider 10:10am: Ty is showing Lee something. I can’t hear Lee well 10:10am: Judge: I gave you extra time on the response, didn’t I 10:10am: Ty is speaking. Can’t hear him. Stupid mic 10:11am: Judge: if you wanted me to consider the petition, you needed to file August 30th. And you didn’t 10:12am: Judge: now you’re trying to get around the deadline 10:13am: Judge: instead of supplementing your response, you filed an amended petition 10:14am: Judge: you are trying to get around the August 30th deadline. And they want to strike the petition. Is that right 10:14am: Volney: that’s the point of rule 59. You can’t introduce evidence by slapping it on a petition 10:15am: Volney: levels and levels of problems with letting P add the petition at this point 10:17am: Hsu (not Lee, sorry): court has to consider all pleadings for tcpa. There’s no surprise here! Same affidavits. 10:18am: Volney brought up the fraudulently notarized affidavits. Also points out petition had material that wasn’t attached to response so there is surprise 10:20am: Judge: let’s hear motions. I will deal with this later 10:20am: Sam Johnson going first. 10:21am: SJ: why are we here? He’s got a nice presentation prepared. 10:23am: SJ: tcpa two step explanation. Arguing it’s about her right of free speech re health and safety. Showing her tweet re standing with victims. 10:23am: Judge: are these the only tweets they are suing about? SJ: hard to tell your honor 10:25am: SJ: public figure discussion now. Citing Ps depo re his fame. He’s got a really good presentation. 10:26am: SJ now arguing LP public figure 10:29am: SJ: burden now on P to provide evidence. First on causation and damages. Shows that P’s depo shows how he has no evidence of causation or damages. 10:29am: SJ: going over clear and specific standard. 10:31am: SJ: defamation elements now. P attached no statements from Jamie to his response. No evidence of statement. That’s false. NOW showing video loop of him pulling her hair! Greatness 10:32am: SJ: TI claim. No contracts, no relationships, etc. identified. 10:36am: Ty arguing response. Ty: are we including second pet? Judge: I don’t think so. Judge: what statement are we talking about re ms marchi 10:37am: I can’t understand Ty’s muttering 10:39am: Judge: it’s not fair for you to replead to get around the motion to dismiss 10:39am: Lemione rises. 10:40am: Judge: what was the issue with the notary (to TY). I can’t hear TY! 10:42am: Brief discussion of affidavits. Judge: I’ll probably consider the affidavits anyway, but right now I want to know what tweet of Ms Marchi we’re talking about 10:43am: Ty is really hard for me to hear. Sounds like relying on the “I know he’s a predator “ tweet 10:44am: Now he’s rambling about clear evidence of conspiracy because hair pulling not sexual assault. I think. Huh? 10:45am: I don’t think TY is answering judges questions well. He’s rambling. 10:46am: Judge: does she use his name ever? Where is the context that I can see? 10:46am: Judge: she’s talking about somebody and you can’t even show me the context 10:48am: Ty now mentioning technical problems. Defense team grinning 10:49am: Judge: I think they are claiming surprise. What’s different with second petition? 10:50am: Judge: amended pleadings can’t defeat Summary judgment. 10:52am: Judge seems just a little bit annoyed. I don’t think he’s buying Ty. Judge: point me to the Marchi evidence in your response or first amended pet. 10:52am: Judge: where’s your evidence of plan for conspiracy? Ty: fumbling 10:52am: Judge: just tell me where the evidence of plan is. 10:53am: Dear GOD TY mumbles. I wish my hearing were better. 10:56am: This conspiracy stuff is bananas. Look on judge’s face. Apparently, the evidence of the plan is Monica and Jamie tweeting about the same person. Rational inference they had a plan. 10:58am: Judge: if I like a cat picture on Facebook, I’m not in a conspiracy. You are reading too much into liking a post. 10:59am: TY wants a recess! 11:06am: We’re back 11:06am: Ty: it’s in marchi’s motion. What?? 11:08am: Judge raking ty over the coals on his conspiracy def. 11:10am: Judge: what cause of action does conspiracy relate to? Ty: defamation. Now he’s arguing about Toye’s texts. Judge: that’s not Marchi 11:10am: Judge: where does Marchi’s plan exist? 11:11am: This conspiracy discussion is not going well for Ty. Judge said he’s reaching. 11:11am: Judge: show me the proof of conspiracy. Ty: babbles. 11:13am: Ty babbling about rational inference. Judge: I don’t think it’s rational at all. 11:13am: Judge just dismissed claim against Marchi for TI. 11:14am: Pretty sure he dismissed conspiracy 11:15am: Marchi is dismissed on everything!!! 11:15am: Now on to Rial 11:16am: Lemione time: he’s got a pic of a dumpster fire up. Unfortunately, I can’t hear him  11:17am: Lemione: tcpa designed to protect citizens speaking out. Now has pic of Vic kissing someone up with label “libel proof” 11:17am: Lemione: now going over all of Vic’s history. Brutal. 11:18am: Ty: interrupts to mumble an objection. This is all hearsay! 11:18am: Ty also thinks this is irrelevant. And speculative. Etc. He’s animated. 11:22am: next arg: CDA defeats retweet claims. Judge seems to be accepting this re public figures. Ty: this defense was raised tooo late. Judge: did you address it in your response? We’re arguing about the law right now. 11:25am: On to defamation. Lemione argues the lack of context for the tweets is fatal in libel cases. To meet clear and spec burden, they need to produce the context. They haven’t. And L thinks it’s because the context was bad for Vic. 11:29am: Judge to Lemoine: hard to prove stuff false, right? That’s what’s bad about saying stuff like that. Lemione: my folks have never said he was a pedophile . 11:30am: Judge: I really just want you to go through elements and arguments. Lemione: on to actual malice. Judge: I agree he’s an LPPF. 11:31am: Lemione: Toye’s depo negates malice. Pages and pages of testimony showing his research and what he believed. 11:33am: Had to look at a work email. Now we’re talking about Dahlin aff. And Vic not denying it either. “I don’t recall” is not clear and specific denial. 11:36am: Lemione: makes same malice arg re Monica and her depo showing no malice. 11:37am: Relying on Kahn , TI must fail says Lemione. Ty’s turn. 11:44am: We’re on a break while judge hears another matter at the bench. Nick is wearing a very bad suit with sneakers. INTERLUDE 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
Judge: did he have a contract? Ty: some of them. Judge: which? Ty: I don’t know.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1170020375306149888
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:09
|
|
|
this entire hearing has been "things that you don't want the judge saying to you" https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170022491521204224
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:So, assuming everything is dismissed like it sounds like, what's the next step for the defendants and their lawyers to file an anti-SLAPP suit? Would that come up today or would it be a separate filing? at least that's my understanding of the situation, it may have evolved somewhat from the original scope
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170025918527627264 e: what https://twitter.com/ottovonbisbark/status/1170026337828052992
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
12:38pm: Now to vicarious liability. Volney just jumped up and told judge ty misrepresented proof of agency. Ty: well that’s in the late filed evidence. Judge: filed in July. 12:39pm: Judge: Vic’s an Indy contractor, right? Ty: well that’s a long inquiry...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
yup here's the total tweets from @ottovonbisbark, can't wait for that transcript and the other notes to drop 10:00am: Judge is here. 10:02am: Debating which MTD to hear first 10:03am: No objections to the press presence 10:04am: Nick walked in! 10:06am: Volney arguing motion to strike 2nd amended pet. Relying on Rule 11. 10:07am: He’s arguing that they messed up the response to the MTD so they dropped the 2nd amended pet. Volney has a bench brief on rule 59 10:08am: Can’t back door in the improper affidavits with petitions he said 10:09am: Judge: is this a response to the MTD? P: no. Judge: then I’m not going to consider 10:10am: Ty is showing Lee something. I can’t hear Lee well 10:10am: Judge: I gave you extra time on the response, didn’t I 10:10am: Ty is speaking. Can’t hear him. Stupid mic 10:11am: Judge: if you wanted me to consider the petition, you needed to file August 30th. And you didn’t 10:12am: Judge: now you’re trying to get around the deadline 10:13am: Judge: instead of supplementing your response, you filed an amended petition 10:14am: Judge: you are trying to get around the August 30th deadline. And they want to strike the petition. Is that right 10:14am: Volney: that’s the point of rule 59. You can’t introduce evidence by slapping it on a petition 10:15am: Volney: levels and levels of problems with letting P add the petition at this point 10:17am: Hsu (not Lee, sorry): court has to consider all pleadings for tcpa. There’s no surprise here! Same affidavits. 10:18am: Volney brought up the fraudulently notarized affidavits. Also points out petition had material that wasn’t attached to response so there is surprise 10:20am: Judge: let’s hear motions. I will deal with this later 10:20am: Sam Johnson going first. 10:21am: SJ: why are we here? He’s got a nice presentation prepared. 10:23am: SJ: tcpa two step explanation. Arguing it’s about her right of free speech re health and safety. Showing her tweet re standing with victims. 10:23am: Judge: are these the only tweets they are suing about? SJ: hard to tell your honor 10:25am: SJ: public figure discussion now. Citing Ps depo re his fame. He’s got a really good presentation. 10:26am: SJ now arguing LP public figure 10:29am: SJ: burden now on P to provide evidence. First on causation and damages. Shows that P’s depo shows how he has no evidence of causation or damages. 10:29am: SJ: going over clear and specific standard. 10:31am: SJ: defamation elements now. P attached no statements from Jamie to his response. No evidence of statement. That’s false. NOW showing video loop of him pulling her hair! Greatness 10:32am: SJ: TI claim. No contracts, no relationships, etc. identified. 10:36am: Ty arguing response. Ty: are we including second pet? Judge: I don’t think so. Judge: what statement are we talking about re ms marchi 10:37am: I can’t understand Ty’s muttering 10:39am: Judge: it’s not fair for you to replead to get around the motion to dismiss 10:39am: Lemione rises. 10:40am: Judge: what was the issue with the notary (to TY). I can’t hear TY! 10:42am: Brief discussion of affidavits. Judge: I’ll probably consider the affidavits anyway, but right now I want to know what tweet of Ms Marchi we’re talking about 10:43am: Ty is really hard for me to hear. Sounds like relying on the “I know he’s a predator “ tweet 10:44am: Now he’s rambling about clear evidence of conspiracy because hair pulling not sexual assault. I think. Huh? 10:45am: I don’t think TY is answering judges questions well. He’s rambling. 10:46am: Judge: does she use his name ever? Where is the context that I can see? 10:46am: Judge: she’s talking about somebody and you can’t even show me the context 10:48am: Ty now mentioning technical problems. Defense team grinning 10:49am: Judge: I think they are claiming surprise. What’s different with second petition? 10:50am: Judge: amended pleadings can’t defeat Summary judgment. 10:52am: Judge seems just a little bit annoyed. I don’t think he’s buying Ty. Judge: point me to the Marchi evidence in your response or first amended pet. 10:52am: Judge: where’s your evidence of plan for conspiracy? Ty: fumbling 10:52am: Judge: just tell me where the evidence of plan is. 10:53am: Dear GOD TY mumbles. I wish my hearing were better. 10:56am: This conspiracy stuff is bananas. Look on judge’s face. Apparently, the evidence of the plan is Monica and Jamie tweeting about the same person. Rational inference they had a plan. 10:58am: Judge: if I like a cat picture on Facebook, I’m not in a conspiracy. You are reading too much into liking a post. 10:59am: TY wants a recess! 11:06am: We’re back 11:06am: Ty: it’s in marchi’s motion. What?? 11:08am: Judge raking ty over the coals on his conspiracy def. 11:10am: Judge: what cause of action does conspiracy relate to? Ty: defamation. Now he’s arguing about Toye’s texts. Judge: that’s not Marchi 11:10am: Judge: where does Marchi’s plan exist? 11:11am: This conspiracy discussion is not going well for Ty. Judge said he’s reaching. 11:11am: Judge: show me the proof of conspiracy. Ty: babbles. 11:13am: Ty babbling about rational inference. Judge: I don’t think it’s rational at all. 11:13am: Judge just dismissed claim against Marchi for TI. 11:14am: Pretty sure he dismissed conspiracy 11:15am: Marchi is dismissed on everything!!! 11:15am: Now on to Rial 11:16am: Lemione time: he’s got a pic of a dumpster fire up. Unfortunately, I can’t hear him 11:17am: Lemione: tcpa designed to protect citizens speaking out. Now has pic of Vic kissing someone up with label “libel proof” 11:17am: Lemione: now going over all of Vic’s history. Brutal. 11:18am: Ty: interrupts to mumble an objection. This is all hearsay! 11:18am: Ty also thinks this is irrelevant. And speculative. Etc. He’s animated. 11:22am: next arg: CDA defeats retweet claims. Judge seems to be accepting this re public figures. Ty: this defense was raised tooo late. Judge: did you address it in your response? We’re arguing about the law right now. 11:25am: On to defamation. Lemione argues the lack of context for the tweets is fatal in libel cases. To meet clear and spec burden, they need to produce the context. They haven’t. And L thinks it’s because the context was bad for Vic. 11:29am: Judge to Lemoine: hard to prove stuff false, right? That’s what’s bad about saying stuff like that. Lemione: my folks have never said he was a pedophile . 11:30am: Judge: I really just want you to go through elements and arguments. Lemione: on to actual malice. Judge: I agree he’s an LPPF. 11:31am: Lemione: Toye’s depo negates malice. Pages and pages of testimony showing his research and what he believed. 11:33am: Had to look at a work email. Now we’re talking about Dahlin aff. And Vic not denying it either. “I don’t recall” is not clear and specific denial. 11:36am: Lemione: makes same malice arg re Monica and her depo showing no malice. 11:37am: Relying on Kahn , TI must fail says Lemione. Ty’s turn. 11:44am: We’re on a break while judge hears another matter at the bench. Nick is wearing a very bad suit with sneakers. INTERLUDE 11:52am: Back. Letting Ty argue rial and Toye. Bold choice, Cotton. Let’s see how that works out for them. 11:53am: Can’t hear Ty. He mumbles. He’s got a visual up re what prima facie means. He’s now talking about Monica’s “def of harassment tweet.” 11:56am: He’s getting animated. Glasses off. Still can’t hear well. Judge isn’t looking at him. 11:57am: Judge: do you have a breach of contract claim against Funi? Ty: mumbles 11:58am: Judge: how were you damaged by TI w existing contract? Ty: all these conventions canceled! J: that’s not an existing contract. Judge grilling on which contracts. 12:00pm: Judge doesn’t look like buying all of the inferences that Ty wants. Basically, ty is saying “we can infer they interested with one and they did it with others.” I can’t follow this. And I don’t think it’s my hearing. 12:00pm: Judge: did he have a contract? Ty: some of them. Judge: which? Ty: I don’t know. 12:02pm: Sorry, y’all. Hopefully, the people taking notes can make sense of Ty. He’s from point to point like a bunny chasing inferences. 12:04pm: Judge: do you have affidavits from conventions? T: no judge. Discovery stay! Judge: how’d you get affidavits from others? You got a bunch. Didn’t they? Volney: yes. 12:05pm: Monica is out on all the interference claims. He hasn’t dismissed Def or conspiracy yet. He’ll deal with those later. 12:08pm: Now to Toye. 12:09pm: Judge: how do we know the other people posting on the Internet didn’t cause the damage here? 12:10pm: Judge: I think your problem is you don’t have any evidence, not the standard. 12:15pm: Judge: show me evidence he contacted other conventions. Ty: back to rational inferences that if he did it once he did it again 12:16pm: Toye out on TI. Hasn’t ruled on def. 12:17pm: Funi time. Volney up. Judge: only two tweets? V: right. V: has nice presentation ready. 12:17pm: First tweet. Vic agrees the tweet re not engaging him is try. 12:18pm: Now the don’t condone harassment tweet: he can’t show this statement is about him. 12:19pm: There’s nothing defamatory about that tweet. Refers to Funi affs. 12:20pm: No evidence of malice. No depo. No written discovery. Nothing. Refers to Barretto aff about what they meant. Heated back and forth on twitter. 12:21pm: Judge wants Ty to talk now. What statement are you suing on 12:24pm: Ty rambling about Funi’s investigations. Judge: the statements are true? Ty: right but implication is clear because of context. 12:25pm: Judge is looking through O’Conner’s. Can’t tell what book. 12:26pm: Hsu whispering to Ty. Ty: context! This is about context! 12:28pm: Ty can speak up when he wants to. Now he’s talking about Rial. Heavens. 12:29pm: Ty: Funi has been vague about investigation! Because it would show rial is a liar! And that goes to conspiracy because why did they care! 12:33pm: Now he’s trying to say if V denied the investigation that’s enough under Kahn? I must not have heard that correctly. But who knows anymore! It’s defamation per se, judge! We don’t have to have damaged. Wut. 12:37pm: Ty’s evidence of conspiracy is that Funi is “curiously protective” of Rial. Now he’s off on defamation, judges: we’re on conspiracy. Ty: goes on about emails btw rial and Funi. Judge: but that’s after they fired him. Ty: we have circumstantial evidence of earlier 12:38pm: Now to vicarious liability. Volney just jumped up and told judge ty misrepresented proof of agency. Ty: well that’s in the late filed evidence. Judge: filed in July. 12:39pm: Judge: Vic’s an Indy contractor, right? Ty: well that’s a long inquiry... 12:40pm: I have a feeling Volney is going to make mincemeat out of this when he gets back up. 12:43pm: Volney points out evidence in record of IC status. Referring judge to V’s depo where V says he’s an IC. Going over the elements discussed re not a W2. There’s no argument here the VAs was an employee. 12:48pm: Doesn’t look like vicarious liability is going to pin liability on Funi for anything Monica did. 12:54pm: Done. Funi out on conspiracy and TI. He will consider the def claims against Funi, Toye and Rial and rule within 30 days. Good times. Wiggly Wayne DDS fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Sep 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:Nick started a GoFundMe page for 'legal fees' but how much of that Vic gets is unknown. He only seemed barely aware of it. it's another legal minefield that will likely be stepped on in the future
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
there may be more details in this thread over time: https://twitter.com/LawoftheGame/status/1170054130724945920 e: well if that's a more precise account then ottovonbisbark was downplaying the judge's ire somehow Wiggly Wayne DDS fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Sep 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
Covok posted:Wait, isn't it illegal for another private citizen in America to bankroll a civil case when you're plantif? Did they change that?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
the threading is broken, please teach anyone attending future hearings how to thread https://twitter.com/LawoftheGame/status/1170064897431883776
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:You can't notarise by phone because you need to confirm the guy's identity when you notarise something. He's either lying or stupid. and another set of notes: https://twitter.com/HerExcell/status/1170054597228027904 e: i saw someone mention this during the hearing but i thought they were joking https://twitter.com/HerExcell/status/1170060766642393089
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TyBeard10/status/1170116134059819008
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 09:05
|
|
|
on fees there's a rough extreme lowball put together by dunford: https://twitter.com/questauthority/status/1170161391338176513 the replies by other lawyers mentioning the hourly rate could be double is not a promising sign
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 10:28
|
|
|
Pigbuster posted:Oh Jesus Christ the Manfred Von Karma comparison are you loving kidding me
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
oh they fabricated more bs to get greg's account locked down. was wondering why he was suspiciously quiet about the judge being harassed https://twitter.com/fsckemall/status/1170346934701367297
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 20:35
|
|
|
the fourth and final part of the pseudo-transcript is up: https://bbfpics.blogspot.com/2019/09/worst-transcript-ever-1062019.html?m=1 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
so turns out fasttracking the transcript was more than lawtwitter expected ($1170) so after polling they sent in the official request two hours then, and setup a gofundme 20m ago it's probably hit the goal by the time i've posted this (gofundme is updating quite slowly), any extra goes to RAINN: https://www.gofundme.com/f/threadnought-percys-implosion
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
and done, the transcript was already pending but that's the costs covered
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
found the source, 3 june 2019 on-stream https://youtu.be/GqgT6BU7J9Q?t=7085
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Piell posted:https://twitter.com/TheBrownFolder/status/1171065787597107203?s=20 quote:Screech:
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2019 18:34
|
|
|
Piell posted:https://twitter.com/TheBrownFolder/status/1171065787597107203?s=20 looking forward to it in the sanctions/bar hearings
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
Whats fair is fair, right?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Julias posted:So to be clear, there are two lawyers involved- Percy Tyrone 'Ty' Beard, who is Vic's actual lawyer (and lazy and incompetent). https://twitter.com/fsckemall/status/1171809420638085121
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
can i just notarise this over the phone?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2019 12:21
|
|
|
Julias posted:After Bead falsely notarized the affidavits in his response to the TCPAs, he got other lawyers in his firm to sign off on it, which would open up the possibility for them to get sanctioned too. What likely happened is that the firm saw the writing on the wall and hired Hsu to course correct this flaming, sinking ship the best that they could manage, while possibly offering a way to defend the firm from sanctions as a result of Ty's improper conduct. in either way he was brought in far too late to help the hearing by participating outside of statements on law rather than fact, but any attempt to help their legal strategy is worth it at this point Syritta posted:The defense mentioned that you can actually do that but you need a video connection and to actually watch them sign, which I thought was interesting. (Obviously Beard did not do this.) them doubling down on "we always intended to amend the filing" is not going to bite them come sanctions time
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2019 15:50
|
|
|
Ignis posted:@questauthority on Twitter is going through the transcript right now and he's very good at explaining said legal subtleties. part 1: https://twitter.com/questauthority/status/1172642897566609409 part 2 (ongoing): https://twitter.com/questauthority/status/1172947630751662080
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2019 20:50
|
|
|
divabot posted:So what's the split on attorney fees like? All Vic, some Vic some Ty? How does this work in Texas? probably expects the gfm warchest to cover it after all it's $240k~ a lawsuit can't cost that much
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2019 23:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
OneDeadman posted:Iirc , The GFM will almost certainly be considered during Sanctions if it's determined to be SLAPP since it's one of the reasons why he's able to pursue the lawsuit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2019 00:17
|
|