David Stebbins v. Joshua Moon and Lolcow LLC. Case: 2:24-CV-00140, Southern District of West Virginia. - Acerthorn sues the Farms

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • 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

Stebbins v. Moon 2:24-cv-00140 — District Court, S.D. West Virginia

  • Docket No.
    2:24-cv-00140
  • Court
    District Court, S.D. West Virginia
  • Filed
    20 de Mar, 2024
  • Nature of Suit
    820 Copyright
  • Cause
    17:101 Copyright Infringement
  • Jurisdiction
    Federal Question
  • Jury Demand
    None
  • Last Filing
    26 de Mayo, 2026

Parties (3)

Parties
Joshua Moon, Lolcow LLC, David Stebbins

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 54)

# Date Description Filing
51 26 de Mayo, 2026 NOTICE OF JUDGMENT as to 42 Notice of Appeal to 4CCA filed by David Stebbins in 4CCA Case Number 26-1398. (msa) PDF
50 26 de Mayo, 2026 4CCA JUDGMENT re: 42 Notice of Appeal to 4CCA in 4CCA Case No. 26-1398. The petition for writ of mandamus is denied. (msa) PDF
49 26 de Mayo, 2026 4CCA OPINION re: 42 Notice of Appeal to 4CCA in 4CCA Case No. 26-1398. (msa) PDF
48 6 de Mayo, 2026 ASSEMBLED ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL TRANSMITTED TO 4CCA re: 42 Notice of Appeal to 4CCA in 4CCA Case Number 26-1556. (ts) PDF
47 6 de Mayo, 2026 ORDER OF 4CCA as to 42 Notice of Appeal to 4CCA in 4CCA Case No. 26-1556. The court grants leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (cmb) PDF
View all 54 filings

In re: David Stebbins 26-1398 — Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

  • Docket No.
    26-1398
  • Court
    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • Filed
    6 de Abr, 2026
  • Terminated
    26 de Mayo, 2026
  • Last Filing
    9 de Jun, 2026

Parties (2)

Parties
In re: DAVID A. STEBBINS

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 20)

# Date Description Filing
20 9 de Jun, 2026 BILL OF COSTS by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon. Date and method of service: 06/10/2026 ecf. [1001995048] [26-1398] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 06/10/2026 05:04 PM] PDF
19 26 de Mayo, 2026 JUDGMENT ORDER filed. Decision: Petition denied. Originating case number: 2:24-cv-00140. Entered on Docket Date: 05/27/2026. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1001985492] [26-1398] CH [Entered: 05/27/2026 11:11 AM] 1 2
18 26 de Mayo, 2026 UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to dismiss appeal [15]; denying Motion to strike [14]; denying Motion to reconsider [10]; denying Motion for writ of mandamus [2] Originating case number: 2:24-cv-00140. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1001985489] [26-1398] CH [Entered: 05/27/2026 11:09 AM] PDF
17 4 de Mayo, 2026 RESPONSE/ANSWER by David A. Stebbins to Motion to dismiss appeal [15]. Nature of response: in opposition. [1001972939] [26-1398] David Stebbins [Entered: 05/05/2026 12:58 AM] 1 2
16 29 de Abr, 2026 RESPONSE/ANSWER by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon to Motion to strike [14]. Nature of response: in opposition. [1001971074] [26-1398] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 04/30/2026 09:12 PM] PDF
View all 20 filings

David Stebbins v. Joshua Moon 26-1556 — Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

  • Docket No.
    26-1556
  • Court
    Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
  • Filed
    4 de Mayo, 2026
  • Nature of Suit
    3820 Copyright
  • Last Filing
    7 de Jun, 2026

Parties (3)

Parties
LOLCOW LLC, JOSHUA MOON, DAVID A. STEBBINS

Recent Filings (showing 5 of 24)

# Date Description Filing
24 7 de Jun, 2026 SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITIES by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon. [1001993253] . [26-1556] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 06/08/2026 11:03 PM] PDF
23 5 de Jun, 2026 INFORMAL REPLY BRIEF by David A. Stebbins. [1001992183] [26-1556] David Stebbins [Entered: 06/06/2026 12:04 AM] PDF
22 28 de Mayo, 2026 INFORMAL RESPONSE BRIEF by Lolcow LLC and Joshua Moon. [1001987336] [26-1556] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 05/29/2026 11:09 AM] PDF
21 28 de Mayo, 2026 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Joshua Moon. Was any question on Disclosure Form answered yes? No [1001987301] [26-1556] Matthew Hardin [Entered: 05/29/2026 10:52 AM] PDF
20 28 de Mayo, 2026 RULE 46 NOTICE issued to Matthew Hardin for Joshua Moon for filing of disclosure form. Requested document due 06/15/2026. [1001987249] [26-1556] CH [Entered: 05/29/2026 10:19 AM] PDF
View all 24 filings
Destacado
I'm trying to remember the last time either Stabby or Greer actually got anything struck from a motion to strike. Seems to me the courts very very rarely do that and prefer just to declare the motion/document as moot.

Also, is he really trying to argue that the court case he lost and was labeled vexatious for is "never before seen" evidence.
 
I dunno here Mr Stabby, I think bringing up more evidence of your vexatious litigation to back up the first claim isn't really introducing anything "new". Harden is just adding more info for the judges to see your methodology for prosecuting your cases.

I doubt the judge will agree to strike this, it's not new information and it's relevant to the original statement.
 
I can barely tell what he's babbling about.

"Defendant instead concedes to the validity of one of them"... how? Which one? There's 2 sections in Hardin's response and neither of them is a concession.

"proceeds to offer brand new, never-before-seen evidence that was not included in the original motion" Is he complaining about the Boone County vexlit exhibit? Hardin explicitly says "there’s a factual issue with Mr. Stebbins’ claim" and corrects it. That's not conceding the validity of his underlying argument, or presenting evidence in support of his own motion.

"The Defendants have been reprimanded by the District Court for this behavior once already." - no they haven't. Here's the entirety of the "smackdown" from ECF 12 that Acerthorn thinks warrants sanction:

1777001007535.png

If a dismissive footnote explaining why a judge isn't bothering with an argument is a reprimand, then Stabby averages 2 reprimands per filing himself.
 
Useful_Mistake dijo:
District Judge overrules Acer's objections and rules that the Magistrate was right
Presiona para expandir...
CALLED IT

Harvey Danger dijo:
My bet is a judge from the 4th makes a discreet phone call to the district judge, and asks him to just accept/reject the magistrate's recommendation already. That lets them moot the whole mess, and avoid the district judge getting poked with a Writ he really has earned.
Presiona para expandir...

Credit to Stabby for forcing this with a credible writ of mandamus complaint. Now the only question is if he will appeal this directly, or try to convert that existing writ request into an appeal so that he can coast off the already-granted IFP status.

(How can that work? No idea, but if anyone's retarded enough to explain how OBVIOUSLY it should be done, it's Stabby.)
 
This is probably the end of this case

Stabby knows he doesn't stand much of a chance and even with his recent windfalls 400 bucks is a lot of money to him. I don't think he will risk it, Stabby will let the case lapse.

Plus it will be dismissed without prejudice so he can always refile it after he "wins" the Sid Alpha case.
 
Última edición:
Seeing how litigious lolcows are lurking their own threads, what's the point of posting those kind of urgent updates to their cases before the point of no return? There's a chance that if they don't read about it here, they might forget/overlook it on their own, thus sinking their own case.
 
SpellforceFan dijo:
Seeing how litigious lolcows are lurking their own threads, what's the point of posting those kind of urgent updates to their cases before the point of no return? There's a chance that if they don't read about it here, they might forget/overlook it on their own, thus sinking their own case.
Presiona para expandir...
Because their cases can lose on the lack of merit, not for failing to respond.
Tracking your own case is not hard, only Greer has problems with it.
 
If anyone ever needs a soundbyte for why Null hates the court system so much, this quote is perfect:

As reflected in the PF&R, the Magistrate Judge determined that the action appeared to be brought for an improper purpose and was substantially similar to prior lawsuits filed by Plaintiff that had been dismissed as frivolous in other courts.[] Nevertheless, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the case could proceed so long as Plaintiff paid the appropriate filing fees.
Presiona para expandir...

Granted that the Magistrate wasn't being asked to dismiss, his restraint blunted Stabby's objection, the District judge could still dismiss, etc. But if you've already got a judge saying "I did the review and this suit is BS", then just recommend tossing it already! If Stabby does shell out the cash, it forces Hardin to go through the song and dance of an endlessly appealed Motion to Dismiss that everyone knows shouldn't be necessary.
 
One of these days I still hope to see a lunatic with a go pro rooting around in a lolcow's shit in search of valuables to pay lawyers fees after a bullshit lawsuit is thrown out. Of all of Null's ideas that was one of his finest. This may be a step in the right direction. Obviously Frank Hassle would be the best for the job as Ethan Ralph would just find a motel and do drugs in it.
 
SpellforceFan dijo:
Seeing how litigious lolcows are lurking their own threads, what's the point of posting those kind of urgent updates to their cases
Presiona para expandir...
Cus users of the site, including casual readers not logged in, are bound by the Terms of Service of this site. Stebbins, as a user of the site, gives KF "You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content in connection with the Service. You retain copyright over the Content."

It does not in the ToS state that its limited to content you post to KF, but your content. Period. By reading his thread here, KF has a license to His Content. The wereturkey legal fucked by his own tactic. Enticing him to read content here makes him a user.

Anyone reading this post or so much as loading the page of this post electronically or via trained turkey hereby renders unto lol cow supreme, and the entire capital I Internet all copyrights owned or claimed as well as two fifths (or 40 percent) of all hot dog dinners.
 
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo