Son of Sparda 84
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 23 de Feb, 2019
T. Greg Doucette / Thomas Gregory Doucette / greg_doucette / TGDLaw / fsckemall / lawdevnull / TDot - Super Lawyer, Failed Politician, Captain of The Threadnought, Drowning in Debt
- Iniciador del tema ShortRound
- Fecha de inicio
-
🔎 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
- Registrado
- 15 de Abr, 2019
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2014
Crossposting because I can't believe I found this
Why, Yes, I AM Into SLAPPing
One of my partners won an anti-SLAPP motion yesterday in Los Angeles. It wasn’t my own client, and I didn’t draft the motion, but I advised and edited, and I was very proud to be on the…www.popehat.com
I don't see anything wrong with this. It's just an explanation of what anti-SLAPP laws do.
Son of Sparda 84
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 23 de Feb, 2019
There's nothing essentially wrong with it I just found this while looking at Anti Slapp laws.
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2014
I'd be surprised if a First Amendment lawyer hadn't discussed SLAPP repeatedly. It was one of the best developments in defamation defense, from the perspective of defense attorneys at least. These laws deterred a lot of nonsensical litigation that would otherwise have occurred.
Like any other kind of tort reform, though, these statutes have ended up in some cases being used by the very bad actors they were meant to deter.
I'd be very interested in an analysis as to why the California and Texas statutes have had such different results despite facially being very similar to each other. I'm not even talking about Mignogna's case here. The case law in Texas on this statute is just plumb weird.
One of the weirder cases is the one involving a fracking company invoking anti-SLAPP against one of its critics, in one of those famous stories about water catching fire coming out of the faucet and all those usual things. This is not only bizarre because it's an oil company, almost a stereotypically villainous corporation, against a homeowner claiming fracking destroyed his family home. It's that as you look more and more into this case, it looks more and more like the oil company is actually right and the homeowner is a fucking dick and a fraud.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 4 de Mar, 2019
Think we'll see the transcript on monday?
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2014
I honestly don't care. I hope he does whatever is worst for him because I want to see him suffer.
Random Internet Person
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 28 de Jun, 2019
So a GFM?
- Registrado
- 31 de Dic, 2018
If he’s smart he’ll pocket the money, try to scrape together a few grand, and beg to not have his bankruptcy agreement dismissed.
- Registrado
- 28 de Dic, 2014
He only has a few days to do that. The eyes of the world are upon him.
Random Internet Person
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 28 de Jun, 2019
Is it wore than the eyes of Texas?
- Registrado
- 11 de Sep, 2019
Best case senario? He takes out a loan from a loan shark thatll break his legs or harvest an organ if he doesnt pay, because im pretty sure you cant even get a payday loan with a bankruptcy.
Though I wonder if his soon to be wife will put up collateral and get a loan for him to pay this off(or take a short term loan in her name). Betting this will probably happen sadly, but he will talk some big game on twitter as if he "hustled" for it.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 9 de Mar, 2019
When T. Greg wakes up in the morning:
"Who am I going to grift today?"
"Who am I going to grift today?"
- Registrado
- 31 de Dic, 2018
I’m thinking his fiancé has been paying his bills so he can role play public defender. Now for whatever reason she can’t/won’t.
- Registrado
- 11 de Sep, 2019
might have told him that if they are gonna get married, some changes are gonna have to happen before that.
Random Internet Person
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 28 de Jun, 2019
What does she even do? He still has three payments to fullfill
- Registrado
- 31 de Dic, 2018
If I recall correctly she’s an optometrist or something similar so she probably does ok. Might still have some med school debt though. That and paying the monthly bills for your unemployable boyfriend adds up.
- Registrado
- 5 de Ago, 2019
Time for a bad joke, regardless of whether or not that info is accurate.
She might be an optometrist but she can't see that she's walking into a trap.
Son of Sparda 84
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 23 de Feb, 2019
And now your daily dose of Lawtwitter
A wild Popehat was spotted
A wild Popehat was spotted
- Registrado
- 8 de Mayo, 2019
"They are obsessed by the fact that Chupp took Lemoine's binder and not Ty's." Yes, because it's a problem for the defendants when bringing it to the appeals court. How would it look for the defendants in appeals if the only information plaintiff's could argue was out of a binder that the plaintiff was never provided prior to the hearing? It'd look pretty bad if it was determined the plaintiff had sufficient evidence, but was unable to argue it at the hearing because of Lemoine's spite.