Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. (2019) - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.

Hey, remember how Vic was an anti-Semite because he once described a bunch of noise from a room next-door as a "holocaust?" Well, it seems Mr. Lemonsquares hates the dirty Japs.

Ver archivo adjunto 833518

Also, this deposition lasted 8 hours-- that might as well have been a death march for someone who's never been deposed before...

...but Vic's endured as much at the con scene.

Also, I'm still reading this depo, and I found something rather scummy:

833523
 
Also, this deposition lasted 8 hours-- that might as well have been a death march for someone who's never been deposed before...

...but Vic's endured as much at the con scene.

Also, I'm still reading this depo, and I found something rather scummy:

Ver archivo adjunto 833523

I wish Carrie would've said the bodybag line to J. Sean here. This is the kind of loaded question that gets people decked.
 
A C&D is legally meaningless.

But they could've used it to show intention to silence them. Usually in these kinds of cases, you have a long thread of informal complaints, letters, phone calls, and C&D sent before filing suit. (Like Null's vexatious, litigious friends who keep having their cases thrown out.) We don't have that here, that I know of.

They have to show intent to intimidate or silence critics for SLAPP somehow. The mere act of filing a case doesn't do it. Nick setting up the GFM to "kick back" is the closest intent they have.

...although, typing that just now makes me second guess myself. What if they're going to argue that lack of previous pushback means Vic didn't find the claims defamatory enough to fight, but the entire motivation for the lawsuit is 3rd party censorship? In announcing the lawsuit, Vic claimed it was the "last option" to get back his reputation and career, but other than the TDMA letters and the tweet denying the worst claims on January 20th, what did he do?

That's the only valid angle of attack I can see where the GFM directly leads to a finding that Vic's suit is a SLAPP. Jokes about superlolyers aside, a dumb plan for a weak defense is still a plan.
 
Yep, that was my reaction as well. I think there's 1 more layer--maybe it doesn't matter if the GFM itself fuels the denial of his client's participation, I think they want that "enemies list" to prove that any lawsuit Vic filed was motivated by that desire, no matter who wound up paying for it.

If I understand anti-SLAPP correctly, MoRonica wins if they can show the suit was intended to silence their legitimate discussions of public news. If Vic talked about suing them after the ANN articles were widespread, but before MoRonica's tweets came out, they can make a case that silencing them was the intent all along.

That is, they can make a very weak and dumb case, considering Vic sued after their tweets, and considering (if I remember correctly) Vic never sent a Cease and Desist demanding them to shut up, or any kind of peremptory threat about disclosing info. Ty sent TDMA letters alleging defamation, but that's a matter for a court to decide, hence the need for the suit to go to trial. That lack of prolonged C&D arguing, with the usual several rounds of threats and complaints, is starts looking like a planned move instead of just Ty skipping some steps...
Monica 1st tweet was around 6th Feb
833531


Marchi 6th/9th feb
833537

833540


Toye I'm not sure. But I bet before 19feb

GFM was 19th Feb

Timing goes against Lemoine theory.
 
Última edición:
Legit angry now. I think I'll go find a nice glass of wine and a book before I say something even more stupid than usual.

But they could've used it to show intention to silence them. Usually in these kinds of cases, you have a long thread of informal complaints, letters, phone calls, and C&D sent before filing suit. (Like Null's vexatious, litigious friends who keep having their cases thrown out.) We don't have that here, that I know of.

They have to show intent to intimidate or silence critics for SLAPP somehow. The mere act of filing a case doesn't do it. Nick setting up the GFM to "kick back" is the closest intent they have.
I see what you're saying now, I think I must have misunderstood a little before.
 
I notice that they took some time to go after Vic trying to brand him as some kind of Nazi sympathizer because at one point some of the Risembool Rangers referred to him as "Fuhrer" (I'm surprised he never referenced that there's a character in FMA often referred to as Fuhrer Bradley), anyway, I'm curious if Vic's side ever gave Jaime crap as the script writer for Hetalia since there's a ton of Hetalia fans that not only wore Nazi regalia but (at LEAST once, maybe more) raised a ruckus by doing full on Nazi salutes at anime cons.
 
Well it's easy to see why Nick thought Lemonhead was just a swell stand up guy. Yes he has to try and get anything from Vic as his clients are completely exceptional and they have nothing. Still...

What a complete piece of shit.
 
Well it's easy to see why Nick thought Lemonhead was just a swell stand up guy. Yes he has to try and get anything from Vic as his clients are completely exceptional and they have nothing. Still...

What a complete piece of shit.

"Zealously representing your client."

And people wonder why lawyers get a bad rap.
 
"Zealously representing your client."

And people wonder why lawyers get a bad rap.
To be fair, I don't blame them for doing stupid things if they have clients that want them to do stupid things. That's their job, even if it makes them look stupid. If your clients want to waste their money on something frivolous, then that's up to them.

The only actual stupid part on their end is the part where they don't make sure they are gonna get paid by the end of this.

Also does anyone remember when Marchi's deadline for the TCPA is?
 
Monica 1st tweet was around 6th Feb
Ver archivo adjunto 833531

GFM was 19th Feb

Timing goes against Lemoine theory

There's earlier Monica tweets in Funi's TCPA Exhibits, that imply even earlier ones. Feb 4th:

1562710584733.png

That's why they lead off asking for the Vic<->Nick texts. I don't remember the timeline for con cancellations, but Funi fired Vic on Jan 29th and tweeted about it Feb 11th; RoosterTeeth fired him on Feb 4th, and the ANN article about RT included Monica's tweets above from the same day. If MoRonica can show Vic planned to immediately squash MoRonica's confirmation of the rumors, before they caused cons to cancel and Funi/RT to fire him, they can say this suit isn't about damages; it's about revenge, or censorship.

At least, that's what I think they're going for. I don't think the timelines lines up either, but it may hinge on specific quirks of how a TCPA finding of SLAPP status works.
 
Legit angry now. I think I'll go find a nice glass of wine and a book before I say something even more stupid than usual.


I see what you're saying now, I think I must have misunderstood a little before.
Now I can fully understand why Nick thinks lemonade is a slimeball. I thought casey was in a bad spot doing what he could, this klown...zero respect. On the day he leaves this planet, if one asks about him, we should answer we never speak ill of the dead, Lemonhead is dead....good!
 
Lot of new documents coming down from the Ron and Monica side from what I'm reading on Twitter. Looks like a copy of Vic's deposition may be attached. Motion to depose Nick it looks like. I haven't seen them yet. More attacks on Nick per Doucette.


For the curious, no Nick isn't going to be keelhauled by his State Bar for allegedly being guilty of "maintenance." There is a United States Supreme Court case, NAACP v. Button, where it's held that a state cannot restrict lawyers or non-lawyers from providing support (such as legal advice, non-legal advice, and encouragement) by invoking the state’s power to exercise its police powers to limit maintenance and champerty.

What this means is that Nick is free under the First Amendment to engage in selfless maintenance (encouragement, setting up a GFM Fund, saying "Got Get Em" and commenting on the case) designed to protect constitutionally protected rights through litigation. If Nick was outright funding the case financially, I'd want to do some more research. But exercising his free speech right to encourage people to donate to Vic? Nah, that's not gonna fly. This is just pure nastiness by the defendants. And God, I hope they lose their TCPA motions when they come.
If you needed any more proof that couchette has zero actual expertise in what the first amendment actually protects here it is in plain text from his own tweets

Maybe someone should ask him how his police brutality case is going now that actual experts told him he was a complete idiot for trying to take it on as a first amendment issue.
 
Monica 1st tweet was around 6th Feb

Marchi 6th/9th feb

Toye I'm not sure. But I bet before 19feb
The first Soye tweet I saw was on Jan 20th, but I was sadly a non-kiwi at the time and I didn't archive it so I can't prove it existed.

When Vic released his first statement, I was tracking the responses and Soye replied something like "This isn't good enough, I know you assaulted 4 people, I have proof". I vaguely recognized the name Ron Toye as someone engaged to a Funi VA, so it jumped out to me at the time. I figured people would react strongly to his allegation, so I checked back an hour or so later to see if anyone had commented on it but I couldn't find it and assume he deleted it fairly quickly.

Edit: I forgot Soye also said in that deleted tweet "You better stay away from me"
 
Última edición:
I'm aware of both of these. I am sort of a fan of these odd zombie doctrines that have been more or less abolished. Literally the only way these dumb arguments against Nick possibly win is by reviving them. My personal opinion is sorry, necromancy is not a doctrine in the law and you can't just revive these things that have been abrogated both in common law and, even more often, by actual statute.

So, lol, enjoy failing.
They’re literally trying to take advantage of Judge Chupp as if he is a complete bumblefuck... I’m sure he’ll just love that once Ty’s team yet again presents actual facts to counter their bullshit.

Well at least we can see what Lemonhead's "theory" of the TCPA will be. He is trying to claim or show that this lawsuit is created and funded by outside parties ie Nick, expressly for the purpose of denying his clients public participation. It's an idiotic concept, because there is more than enough common examples of this being proper. Under Lemonhead's theory The ACLU, ADL, NAACP etc could not function and would be denied access to the courts. He is expressly seeking to block interested parties from forming common cause to fund or assist righting a perceived legal wrong.

And do these morons really want to be opening up Discovery questions while under a TCPA stay, when they are a month past due on producing anything?

Also why is Lemonhead so determined to get Nick under oath BEFORE he drops the TCPA? Is it that he has nothing whatsoever to work with? There is no way to claim his clients speech or actions is in any way a matter of public participation, and not a deliberate malicious act to destroy someone?
They should ask gawker how that went when Peter gave terry 10 million shekels
 
Última edición:
Sabat called out for trying to interfere, Rooster Teeth are cowards refusing to reply to Vic. Funi interfered with contracts directly as a sponsor. This train is never going to stop.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo