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

Every delay is more time for Vic to hide his assets and for the defendant lawyers to badger their clients for the money.

In the immortal word of Chris Hook, where's my money gayboy?
Hiding his assets now could be considered fraudulent concealment.

However, if he put his money into his homestead years ago, Texas has an effectively unlimited homestead exemption. In that eventuality, he just declares bankruptcy and they basically can't do shit even if his home is a mega-mansion.
 
Hopefully Martinez has given him good advice unlike Ty.

And once the inevitable Kiwi Lolsuit starts, I hope this abortion has given dear feeder all the knowledge he needs to ride heard on his lawyers. At the end of the day, the Client is the CLIENT. The Lawyer works for the Client, not the other way around, and the Client can fire his ass on the spot if he does not like the fuckery going on. Even file a Pro Se "I fire my lawyer, your honor, give me 30 days to find a new one" before the court to make it stick if there is any doubt.
 
Hiding his assets now could be considered fraudulent concealment.

However, if he put his money into his homestead years ago, Texas has an effectively unlimited homestead exemption. In that eventuality, he just declares bankruptcy and they basically can't do shit even if his home is a mega-mansion.
Well, in terms of whether "he put his money into his homestead years ago", it appears that he did not do that based on what is in the thread.

In September 2019, or in other words exactly when Vic was in the process of losing the lawsuit, a property was transferred to a trust, specifically an entity called BKM-VJM Trust. Screenshots of the relevant document are in this post:
He transferred it into a trust. Barb and him both owned the house, and they transferred it. This creates a gray area that may have removed the protection on his home. It was transferred September 17, 2019, so shortly after the bench dismissal. This transfer was brought up in the fees hearing. A judge has discretion to decide if it's still protected or not. He no longer owns the home, but this is a not so subtle attempt at hiding assets. For an estate lawyer, Ty fucked up again in his specialty.

Apparently the judge found this move sus, because, well, yeah.
As I recall, the representation of Chupp's words were 'That is fishy to have put your house into a trust', and Ron ran with 'HE IS HIDING MONEY AND THE JUDGE SAID WE CAN MAKE HIM HOMELESS!' or something...

I have no idea whether this move could potentially have defeated Texas' homestead exemption and don't care enough to investigate at all. But what a bow at the end of all this it would be if that was indeed the case, that would be a masterclass of strategy..... One would require the deepest understanding of Sun Tzu in order to recognize its magnificence.
 
>Ty Beard fucked up estate planning

LMAO. Vic deserves to lose his money if he ended up paying a single cent to this clown and Ty and his firm should be paying all of Vic's fees for maintaining Martinez Hsu, if not all his fees in general.
Hiding his assets now could be considered fraudulent concealment.

However, if he put his money into his homestead years ago, Texas has an effectively unlimited homestead exemption. In that eventuality, he just declares bankruptcy and they basically can't do shit even if his home is a mega-mansion.
Soye claims he has a lien on Vic's house, so it seems to already be too late.
 
I have no idea whether this move could potentially have defeated Texas' homestead exemption and don't care enough to investigate at all. But what a bow at the end of all this it would be if that was indeed the case, that would be a masterclass of strategy..... One would require the deepest understanding of Sun Tzu in order to recognize its magnificence.
So Ty Beard can't even estate plan right. What a shocker.
 
The Hearing has been Rescheduled to November 1st 10:30AM
So in order of least to most likely, what happens?

1) Chupp actually provides some reasoning for his original ruling and just rules the exact same way again, but unappealably.
2) Chupp is so angry at being overruled he jacks down the fees for everyone and provides reasoning.
3) Chupp is so angry at being overruled he jacks up the fees for everyone and provides reasoning.
4) Chupp Chupps it up in such a Chupped-up unpredictable way that literally everyone is forced to appeal and cross-appeal and it Jarndyces on a couple more years.
 
Bored so here's people talking about Vic's house and assets
2057a9bc8898c269ac52aaa121afe5d6.png b545d80604f9c3f624f83c9c4971e72c.png 01e5ded20b57bb81c6890f448251f8b9.png
 
4) Chupp Chupps it up in such a Chupped-up unpredictable way that literally everyone is forced to appeal and cross-appeal and it Jarndyces on a couple more years
This would be the most entertaining outcome. Vic is no doubt completely checked out by this point and just getting on with whatever life he can salvage, so the only people that would really suffer are the defendents, who are all on the hook for enormous fees no matter what.

Bored so here's people talking about Vic's house and assets
Don't forget, this is from the great legal minds who think that Vic's guilt was thoroughly established in a court of law, instead of their dismissal only squeezing past on a technicality, brought about by incompetence.
 
So in order of least to most likely, what happens?

1) Chupp actually provides some reasoning for his original ruling and just rules the exact same way again, but unappealably.
2) Chupp is so angry at being overruled he jacks down the fees for everyone and provides reasoning.
3) Chupp is so angry at being overruled he jacks up the fees for everyone and provides reasoning.
4) Chupp Chupps it up in such a Chupped-up unpredictable way that literally everyone is forced to appeal and cross-appeal and it Jarndyces on a couple more years.
Four is the most likely (and funny) because Chupp is Chupp. Two would be the best for Vic.
 
February 8th is the date of the hearing
I hope they make the argument that having days of depositions was completely unnecessary and unrelated to the TCPA motion, and solely undertaken for the purposes of harassment and inflating bills. That's exactly the kind of wasteful litigation that the TCPA is supposed to stop and shouldn't be rewarded.

As the legal adage goes, the TCPA is supposed to be a shield, not a sword.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo