- Dołączono
- 6 Maj 2019
I am expecting letting the fees through, but not the sanctions. Even HE balked at those, which is fucking SAYING something.
Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. (2019) - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.
- Twórca wątku 5t3n0g0ph3r
- Data rozpoczęcia
-
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack).
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
diskboomer
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 17 Lis 2019
Well the TCPA apparently expressly states sanctions must be given, but then again I’m sure until this case Chupp never even encountered a TCPA case before.
If he denies sanctions, or cuts down fess he gets appealed by defendants.
Letting it all through just results in the expected appeal from a single plaintiff.
Padoru
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 14 Cze 2019
correct me if i'm wrong here but i'm pretty sure the wording in the TCPA was something along the lines of Sanctions MAY be awarded which would not be a requirement
- Dołączono
- 26 Wrz 2017
Wrong.
TCPA powiedział(a):
Shall award reasonable fees, may award sanctions
- Dołączono
- 5 Sie 2019
Imagine if Chupp told Lemoine no to sanctions.
Or best case scenario is they get minimum attorney fees and then Chupp has Vic donate the rest to charity or some shit because Lemoine doesn't deserve to see a dime.
That's what happens in my perfect world, since Lemoine is definitely not worth more than a cheap hooker you can find behind the truck stop on the interstate.
Son of Sparda 84
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 23 Lut 2019
HighwayStar
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 23 Wrz 2019
Clearly, this guy didn’t read the whole transcript.
diskboomer
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 17 Lis 2019
sorted thank you.
I really doubt chupp would deny anything they ask for though.
- Dołączono
- 5 Wrz 2019
Chupp to Wheezy: You don't seem too confident about appeals
KV: LOOK AT THAT VIC'S CASE IS SHIT
Deplorables.
diskboomer
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 17 Lis 2019
Wheezy himself, “ the case being dismissed doesn’t mean it was frivolous”.
Worried about appeals. Yup, dead body alright.
- Dołączono
- 5 Sie 2019
LMAO
I'm sorry, I needed that laugh.
They just conveniently ignore how many times Lemoine got bitch slapped. They ignored how Chupp had to literally CORRECT him when it came to Slatosch and how dumb that move was, only for him to assert that Lemoine didn't seem confident about appeals.
secondclass
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 25 Paź 2019
Well, no. The TCPA was substantially amended, effective September 1, 2019, and the amendments apply only to cases filed after September 1, 2019.
The pre-Amendment TCPA had mandatory attorneys fees AND sanctions. For new TCPA cases, attorney's fees are still mandatory, but sanctions are optional.
What you're citing is the new TCPA, which doesn't help Vic at all, since he filed before September 1. For Vic's case, sanctions are mandatory under the old TCPA.
A summary of the changes are here, which notes the amendment changes "the mandatory award of sanctions to a permissive award for a successful movant."
Texas narrows anti-SLAPP law | Insights | DLA Piper Global Law Firm
- Dołączono
- 4 Mar 2019
Even if it wasn't mandatory, I can see little chance Chupp would have done anything other than award some sanctions to lemongrab. It's the patch of least resistance.Well, no. The TCPA was substantially amended, effective September 1, 2019, and the amendments apply only to cases filed after September 1, 2019.
The pre-Amendment TCPA had mandatory attorneys fees AND sanctions. For new TCPA cases, attorney's fees are still mandatory, but sanctions are optional.
What you're citing is the new TCPA, which doesn't help Vic at all, since he filed before September 1. For Vic's case, sanctions are mandatory under the old TCPA.
A summary of the changes are here, which notes the amendment changes "the mandatory award of sanctions to a permissive award for a successful movant."
Texas narrows anti-SLAPP law | Insights | DLA Piper Global Law Firm
www.dlapiper.com
- Dołączono
- 26 Wrz 2017
fair enough, though Chupp could always award like, a dollar in sanctions anyways if he wantedWell, no. The TCPA was substantially amended, effective September 1, 2019, and the amendments apply only to cases filed after September 1, 2019.
The pre-Amendment TCPA had mandatory attorneys fees AND sanctions. For new TCPA cases, attorney's fees are still mandatory, but sanctions are optional.
What you're citing is the new TCPA, which doesn't help Vic at all, since he filed before September 1. For Vic's case, sanctions are mandatory under the old TCPA.
A summary of the changes are here, which notes the amendment changes "the mandatory award of sanctions to a permissive award for a successful movant."
Texas narrows anti-SLAPP law | Insights | DLA Piper Global Law Firm
secondclass
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 25 Paź 2019
Hard to say. I think that Chupp is going to award 75-95% of fees and a relatively small sanction (maybe $10k per defendant or something). That's just a guess though.
I think that JSL's recent moves have illustrated for Chupp that JSL is handling this case in an incredibly aggressive manner. For example, who does merits discovery AFTER the merits have already been ruled on? And trying to put opposing counsel on the stand is equally over-the-top.
JSL has already won at the trial court level, and he's losing a little credibility with the judge by spiking the football. JSL would probably get more in sanctions if he didn't spend so much effort lashing out on everyone on Vic's side.
Ostatnio edytowane:
- Dołączono
- 26 Wrz 2017
I think this is a likely outcome, Chupp doesn't seem motivated to go super in depth on the fees but I doubt he'll give them every dollar they want, but most of fees + sanction on the smaller side is my read too right now
Then again we're all reading the tea leaves here.
- Dołączono
- 5 Wrz 2019
Tea leaves that chupp had a seizure on top of.
- Dołączono
- 4 Mar 2019
Before or after lemon phlegmed up in them?
- Dołączono
- 5 Wrz 2019
After Ty boomered filing the leaves.
- Dołączono
- 5 Sie 2019
Lemoine should have just kept quiet. He could have had his chance for discovery in appeals, which he knew were coming. But he decided to fire off early, try to block Vic and co from appealing while asking for unreasonable shit. Thus, he painted himself as an idiot. If he had kept a low profile upon winning and waited until the right moment to strike he could've gotten almost everything he wanted. But I think the GFM looming over him made him trigger happy. He really doesn't know how to conduct himself in a constructive manner. He's a bull in a china shop when it comes to his decorum in the courthouse.
This might be his strategy but there's a time when it's appropriate to rock the boat and there are times when it is inappropriate to do so. His lack of situational awareness is astounding.
That's what will tank the defense come appeals. Not to mention the billing statements being written and redacted poorly. There's a lot to learn from how messy they were.
And this is their TCPA expert? He tried to correct Chupp, who hasn't even done a case like this before, only for Chupp to shoot him down and school him on shit that any basic law student should know.
But KV is calling this a win. They won't be once we get moving again.
This might be his strategy but there's a time when it's appropriate to rock the boat and there are times when it is inappropriate to do so. His lack of situational awareness is astounding.
That's what will tank the defense come appeals. Not to mention the billing statements being written and redacted poorly. There's a lot to learn from how messy they were.
And this is their TCPA expert? He tried to correct Chupp, who hasn't even done a case like this before, only for Chupp to shoot him down and school him on shit that any basic law student should know.
But KV is calling this a win. They won't be once we get moving again.