Greer v. Aguilar, 2:25-cv-02581 - Another lawsuit from Greer, this time it's about whores

Greer v. Aguilar 2:25-cv-02581 — District Court, D. Nevada

  • Docket No.
    2:25-cv-02581
  • Court
    District Court, D. Nevada
  • Filed
    21 Gru 2025
  • Nature of Suit
    440 Civil Rights: Other
  • Cause
    42:1983 Civil Rights Act
  • Jurisdiction
    Federal Question
  • Jury Demand
    None
  • Last Filing
    5 Lip 2026

Parties (2)

Parties
Cisco Aguilar, Russell Greer

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 35)

# Date Description Filing
29 5 Lip 2026 Consent for Electronic Service of Documents by Plaintiff Russell Greer. (AMMi) (Entered: 07/07/2026) PDF
28 29 Mar 2026 Third AMENDED COMPLAINT against Cisco Aguilar by Russell Greer. No changes to parties. (Filed per ECF No. 27 - MAM) (Entered: 03/31/2026) PDF
27 29 Mar 2026 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler on 3/30/2026. Before this Court is Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint. ECF No. 26. This Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to detach the third amended complaint at ECF No. 26-2 and file it separately on the docket. (no image attached) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KNH) (Entered: 03/30/2026)
29 Mar 2026  
26 11 Mar 2026 MOTION for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint by Plaintiff Russell Greer. Responses are due by 3/26/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Proposed Third Amended Complaint)(MAM) (pleading) (Entered: 03/12/2026) 1 2 3
Greer is denied, there will be no brothel vote this year.

Any normal human being, on failing as often as Greer does, would say to themselves "Another loss. I'm shit at this. I should probably take up another hobby -- something where I have a better chance of succeeding, like playing the lottery."

Greer's biggest disability is his total lack of insight.
 
Greer is denied, there will be no brothel vote this year.
I'll note virtually every Ninth Circuit case cited here is one of those cases that have hundreds or even thousands of cites including outside the Circuit. Ratface's arguments are so retarded they're on the level of arguing that speed limits are unconstitutional.
 
Awesome! We’re already in Greer’s comfort zone: Motion to Undo the Thing That Was Already Done.
 
Good ruling. Some of these are rather politely calling Greer a retard.

Although Greer lists a few instances in which his inability to find five voters has thwarted his petition efforts, finding five voters is a low burden for a petitioner.

"It is shocking how bad Plaintiff is at convincing people."

Greer has not shown at this stage that his struggles to find five voters are any more than isolated incidents

"Plaintiff may want to ask himself why he is the only idiot having this problem."

the law is logically connected to those interests: “[t]he elector requirement operates to ensure that those who exercise this unique legislative
power are members of the political community who will be bound by the proposed initiative should it become law.”

"Plaintiff is clearly an outside meddler, the exact kind of carpetbagging shitbird these laws were designed to frustrate."

Greer’s argument that the Equal Protection Clause requires strict scrutiny is unavailing because the Ninth Circuit has expressly held county residency is not a protected class.48

"Plaintiff could not possibly be more wrong about this point."

So Greer is unlikely to succeed on the merits of any of his claims.

"Plaintiff could not possibly be more wrong about everything."
 
I am very pleased that the Ninth Circuit agreed with my know-nothing take that
1. Chula Vista is the relevant case, and;
2. Greer cited it for the opposite of what it held.
 
Damn... Well at least we still have one more lolsuit left to sperg over while we wait for action on the main case.
 
Greer is denied, there will be no brothel vote this year.
1772572751198.png
 
Good ruling. Some of these are rather politely calling Greer a retard.



"It is shocking how bad Plaintiff is at convincing people."



"Plaintiff may want to ask himself why he is the only idiot having this problem."



"Plaintiff is clearly an outside meddler, the exact kind of carpetbagging shitbird these laws were designed to frustrate."



"Plaintiff could not possibly be more wrong about this point."



"Plaintiff could not possibly be more wrong about everything."
I'm kind of surprised she didn't just dismiss it. Because as soon as the State/Sec State actually responds that whole messy subject of "Practising Law Without a License" will surely come up. He cannot bring this Pro Se.
 
I'm kind of surprised she didn't just dismiss it. Because as soon as the State/Sec State actually responds that whole messy subject of "Practising Law Without a License" will surely come up. He cannot bring this Pro Se.
He's not representing his PAC though, he explicitly is suing on his own, even though his filings use the PAC address as C/O. The judge in her denial called him "unrepresented Nevada resident and political activist Russell Greer", and didn't seem to think it was a problem.
 
He's not representing his PAC though, he explicitly is suing on his own, even though his filings use the PAC address as C/O. The judge in her denial called him "unrepresented Nevada resident and political activist Russell Greer", and didn't seem to think it was a problem.
She doesn't know about the PAC yet. Just because he says he is doing something "as an individual" does not mean this is legally the case. He is the sole or senior corporate officer of both a PAC and an LLC seeking to benefit from this action. He needs a lawyer to bring this.
 
She doesn't know about the PAC yet. Just because he says he is doing something "as an individual" does not mean this is legally the case. He is the sole or senior corporate officer of both a PAC and an LLC seeking to benefit from this action. He needs a lawyer to bring this.
He brought the case as Russell Greer. That a pac exists is largely irrelevant. He has standing and filed it. Just because someone else can benefit doesn't negate the standing of the person who brought it. Also neither the PAC nor LLC can vote or sign a petition so they really don't benefit.
 

Załączniki

Wstecz
Top Na dole