Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)

[LOWERCASE LETTERS]

Bennet's not off criminal rotation until the 1st, so there's gonna be even more of this shit until MABYE something happens.

 

[Harvey Danger]

I just want to reiterate, Schulte is not good for Greer. It is a rejection of a futility argument in a situation with some similarities to what Greer is arguing here. Hardin didn't cite it, but if he had it indeed would have supported his position.

For fun and autism, I clicked Greer's link and read through it.

Late edit: should have clarified I read the O'Bannon case, not Shulte. I wanted to see if his other citation about futility had more to say about conferring.

Spoiler: These are not the precedents you seek

The context is that Plaintiff's counsel was doing a deposition of a defense witness over Zoom. In the middle of the depo, defense counsel started providing her documents to help her testimony, but they hadn't been produced to Plaintiff. Counsels argued over it, depo resumed, more un-disclosed documents were used, and Plaintiff called off the depo to take it up with the Court directly.

Here's the entirety of the meet-and-confer analysis.



This was true, because those issues were already disputed in real time, over Zoom. The quasi-resolution already happened: defense provided the full documents they lately discovered, after the depo. The sanctions are about culpability for late production (denied) and for conduct during the Zoom hearing (granted). Culpability is the issue disputed, not the facts of the case, and it's futile to get them to confer about that when they already talked and positions are already stated.

Here's how GreeePT characterized it.

C. Persuasive Authority Confirms That Conferral Is Not Required Where It Would Be Futile

Courts within the Tenth Circuit have recognized that conferral requirements do not apply where further discussion would be objectively futile. In O’Bannon v. PHS-CCM Health, the District of Kansas excused conferral, where the parties’ positions were irreconcilable and further discussion would have been “futile.” No. 22-2060, 2024 WL 7772193, at *4 (D. Kan. Oct. 13, 2024). Although O’Bannon arose under Rules 16 and 30, its reasoning is procedural, not rule specific. The meet-and-confer requirement exists to facilitate resolution, not to shield completed misconduct from judicial review. Where, as here, conferral could not have changed the outcome, it is not required.

Nothing in O'Bannon says "the parties’ positions were irreconcilable", or that "further discussion would be objectively futile", or anything about "completed misconduct". Nothing in there about acrimonious emails, or one party getting so annoyed with the other that they want to stop communicating.

It is impossible for this to be "persuasive authority" for anything Greer claims, when the ruling doesn't touch on anything crucial to Greer's supposed situation with Hardin.

GreeePT or Greer himself found one judge who said conferral wasn't applicable in an instance where parties had talked and had partly resolved the discovery dispute. Then he spun it as validation for every legal fantasy in his head. Hardin is right that the different O'Bannon case doesn't support anything Greer claims it did, making Greer's "actually it's over here" link as unreliable as his AI filings.

To be honest the O'Bannon court could have worded it clearer, but how were they to know an AI-dependent retard would take this procedural agreement so wildly out of context?

 

[DavidS877]

Bennet's not off criminal rotation until the 1st, so there's gonna be even more of this shit until MABYE something happens.

The 1st was 12 days ago.
He only has one thing on his calendar today.

 

[BIG BILL HELL'S]

Wyświetl załącznik 8414034
This is clearly a lie. If he honestly, sincerely checked each case he'd cite them correctly.

Hardin is correct, those cases do not exist, as cited. That they exist at all is less important than how they are cited. Paralegals have been fired for less egregious fuckups.

Which Russell would know, since...

Wait— which is more egregious? Mis-citing (mal-citing? goof-citing?) a citation, or harassing coworkers?

 

[Accept Only Substitutes]

Wait— which is more egregious? Mis-citing (mal-citing? goof-citing?) a citation, or harassing coworkers?

IMO, harassing co-workers. Misciting things can be cured with education, sometimes it's actually an honest mistake.

Harassing co-workers creates a toxic work environment and opens the firm up to lawsuits.

One gets the firms peepee smacked by a judge the first time or two, the other could cost the firm a shit load of money.

 

[reactionary]

I so wanna be a fly on the wall when Judge Bowtie opens up the docket and realizes he has to go through like 50 new filings.

 

[Sneed Force One]

I'm not going to Greerhelp, but this could've been resolved very cordially but his hatred for Hardin is so all-encompassing he has to scream at the court.

 

[koos koets]

I so wanna be a fly on the wall when Judge Bowtie opens up the docket and realizes he has to go through like 50 new filings.

Bless your hart thinking that he is going to read any of that.

 

[LOWERCASE LETTERS]

The 1st was 12 days ago.
He only has one thing on his calendar today.
Wyświetl załącznik 8414154

Pretty sure he's on till February

 

[Sneed Force One]

I fully expect Bowtie to ignore 50+ filings and a dozen motions and schedule another conference. He'll want the most pressing matters the parties can summon from memory.

 

[DavidS877]

Pretty sure he's on till February

Are you Russell Greer?

http://ors.utd.uscourts.gov/reports/cal.php

https://www.utd.uscourts.gov/magistrate-judge-duty-and-courtroom-rotation

 

[RodgerDodger]

I so wanna be a fly on the wall when Judge Bowtie opens up the docket and realizes he has to go through like 50 new filings.

I assume he has assigned it to 3 different interns to summarize recent filings for him. And each 41% themselves. Except Eddie. Who started eating mushrooms, painted his face white and is laughing maniacly.

 

[HackerX]

Bennet's not off criminal rotation until the 1st, so there's gonna be even more of this shit until MABYE something happens.

Two things I'm curious about:

1) How the hell is the court supposed to catch up on hundreds of filings? With a dozen or so requiring their action? In a sane, normal world where things reliable move, you'd assume they're somewhat caught up on reading them. You simply can't make that assumption here for obvious reasons.

So are they just gonna sit down and skim through the last 6+ months one day, or try to break that into chunks? The former is definitely a grind, but the latter would them into the position where they'd still lag behind while the gap continues to grow. They have to eventually put in some sort of effort for appearance's sake, and while they could accomplish that without reading any of the filings, you kinda sorta assume they don't intend for this case to go on forever.

2) With the bold assumption they do decide to pretend they're presiding over this case, how the fuck are they supposed to go about their orders? Will there be a dozen separate orders for each thing, or are they gonna try to group what they can together into a handful of orders? The former would be more time consuming and scattered all over the place since it'd generally cover items from months ago. Whereas the latter would come off as schizofrenic ramblings from the struggle of connecting disparate items together. None of which having anything to do with copyright, LOL.

That's why Hardin's "bad trajectory" comment fits so perfectly IMO. The court's orders and rulings, if/when they ever may come, are all gonna cover stuff that has jack shit to do with copyright. It certainly doesn't help the court has declined to officiate the case, which has led to hundreds of filings over shit that wouldn't have been necessary if the judges did something more than twice a year, but it was always going to be this way.

Last year they had a fresh start and Greer couldn't even fucking make it to the start of discovery before he bizarrely and oddly made some good faith goofs, all explained by excusable neglect. With that, the rest of 2025, even with the strongest tardguard, pro se sympathy, and unbridled optimism, do they really expect this case to have a chance in hell of making it to trial? You don't get that shit by anything other than a "bad trajectory", made worse by the fact this copyright(?) lawsuit has never left the fucking launch pad!!!

 

[Useful_Mistake]

I'm not going to Greerhelp, but this could've been resolved very cordially but his hatred for Hardin is so all-encompassing he has to scream at the court.

You can't possibly "Greerhelp" because Mr. Hardin has already explained to Greer (like always) as to how this issue could have been avoided

 

[DavidS877]

1) How the hell is the court supposed to catch up on hundreds of filings?

I have a suggestion for them.
1. Grant the sanction for failure to provide the document. Sanction to be dismissal and Plaintiff ordered to pay all costs and fees incurred by the Defendants for the entire action in the district courts, less the $1500 already paid.
2. All other motions denied as moot.

 

[Uncle Buck]

I have a suggestion for them.
1. Grant the sanction for failure to provide the document. Sanction to be dismissal and Plaintiff ordered to pay all costs and fees incurred by the defendants for the entire action in the district courts, less the $1500 already paid.
2. All other motions denied as moot.

Jokes on you; this was decided 250 ECF entries ago and both the District Judge and Magistrate - registered members here - have been letting this go for the lulz.

 

[HackerX]

You can't possibly "Greerhelp" because Mr. Hardin has already explained to Greer (like always) as to how this issue could have been avoided

Hardin made the fatal mistake of believing anyone else is allowed to explain besides Russ. Russ is the only one that gets to do that, and now it's his turn to explain.

 

[RodgerDodger]

I have a suggestion for them.
1. Grant the sanction for failure to provide the document. Sanction to be dismissal and Plaintiff ordered to pay all costs and fees incurred by the Defendants for the entire action in the district courts, less the $1500 already paid.
2. All other motions denied as moot.

That's the cleanest way out with the least possibility for reversal. The 10th isn't going to reverse sanctions over a years worth of recalcitrance and Discovery fuckery by the Plaintiff. He was warned it would be case ending. For any other defendant they would have pulled that trigger months ago.

 

[Botchy Galoop]

Rustle Greeeee has not deviated from his stated intention of sueing in an attempt to bankrupt Jersh and Kiwi Farms (a website) all for having the temerity to snigger at his frivolous litigations against women he considers to be attractive enough to populate his brothel/s and suck him his penis.

He is now deploying A.I. as a tool to keep forcing Hardin to answer all of his legal ignorance, thus unfairly piling on costs and denying justice. I am woooooo shaaaaaa-ing this A,M., because I make it a policy to abandon threads once I stop laughing and start getting MATI. I am almost there.
I can only imagine how Jersh and probably Hardin feel.

I can only conclude using A.I. to rapidly pile on motions and related nonsense is done with malicious intent.
I had Greer figured for a fool. I did not have him on my radar as a cunning evil genius.

This case needs to be put out of it's misery before I lose my sense of humour.

 

[talk talk talk]

How the hell is the court supposed to catch up on hundreds of filings? With a dozen or so requiring their action? In a sane, normal world where things reliable move, you'd assume they're somewhat caught up on reading them. You simply can't make that assumption here for obvious reasons.

Their clerks will do it. Federal judges have several law clerks. Clerking for a federal judge is high prestige for medium pay. This attracts the law-school gunners* who will put in huge hours writing bench memos summarizing the issues.


--

* "Gunner" is a law-school term for the front-of-the-class students who is likely to say, "Professor, could you assign some more readings before the next class?"