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

Destacado
AlexJonesGotMePregnant dijo:
this thread is for discussions of the legal issues at hand, if you're going to argue that chupp is unfit put some fucking evidence in your post. as has been stated multiple times, anonymous reviews from people on the losing side of a judge's decision are as reliable as shane's twitter account. don't speculate with bullshit just because you don't like what chupp ruled. transcripts from the hearing will be out after a brief wait and then we will have some verifiable shit to review.
Presiona para expandir...
He's had stuff end up in the court of appeals that's been reversed with an extraordinary appeal remedy. I think it's happened at least twice now. We're past the point of talking about those reviews.
 
Legioneer dijo:
Some guys misunderstand the logic behind all this.

Previously, someone wrote that if defendants denied certain judge's decisions, claiming the judge was biased, they would look ridiculous. Now many people think that in this particular case it is ridiculous for the plaintiff and ISWV to disagree with the judge's decisions.

But that's not how it works. If the judge said 2*2=4 and the defendants say he is biased, they are lolcow.
If the judge said that 2*2=5 he is lolcow himself.

What Ron wrote to Slatosh is not university algebra or quantum physics.
Presiona para expandir...
The judge did not disagree about what Ron wrote to Slatosch. That’s what y’all don’t get.

The problem for Chupp was that in the instance of the interference with Kamehacon, no measurable damages were presented into evidence.

You need damages the court can remedy for a claim to succeed.

I’m cool with people not understanding the law and commenting, but you look like an idiot for pretending you know the law better than those who practice it.
 
BrandedEagle dijo:
Dumber than shane? because I think Chupp is a lolcow?

and you wonder why I called you a fanboy. Guess I can ignore you from now on since its clear you have nothing to say... unlike Damian who actually responded with something insightful. have a nice day.
Presiona para expandir...
You are yes, dumber than Shane.
 
BrandedEagle dijo:
Dumber than shane? because I think Chupp is a lolcow?

and you wonder why I called you a fanboy. Guess I can ignore you from now on since its clear you have nothing to say... unlike Damian who actually responded with something insightful. have a nice day.
Presiona para expandir...
How have you managed to avoid a thread ban? Tell me the secret of your spastic power.
 
Imperial Agent dijo:
The judge did not disagree about what Ron wrote to Slatosch. That’s what y’all don’t get.
Presiona para expandir...

I get that very well. But it means that he punished a person who is already a victim of a violation of the law for the fact that Judge Chupp and the plaintiff's lawyer have different understandings of TCPA.
If this were the only charge and the only defendant, Vic would have to compensate Ron for his legal expenses by now.
While the breach of contract is confirmed by a witness who is the other party of this contract!

And even though the blackmail was executed. The whole event was jeopardized by the boycott that was threatened and eventually carried out.
 
Imperial Agent dijo:
The judge did not disagree about what Ron wrote to Slatosch. That’s what y’all don’t get.

The problem for Chupp was that in the instance of the interference with Kamehacon, no measurable damages were presented into evidence.

You need damages the court can remedy for a claim to succeed.

I’m cool with people not understanding the law and commenting, but you look like an idiot for pretending you know the law better than those who practice it.
Presiona para expandir...
I thought you were not supposed to lay out damages during a TCPA hearing?
 
Legioneer dijo:
Even if we hypothetically consider a situation where Vic did not suffer any material damage due to Chris Slatosh's decency. Judge Chupp sent a signal that it is normal and not illegal to blackmail conventions and demand termination of a contract.
Presiona para expandir...

No. He sent a signal that he did not immediately see sufficient reasons to hear the case absent the stuff missing in Tv's late amended petition
 
Monkey Prick dijo:
How have you managed to avoid a thread ban? Tell me the secret of your spastic power.
Presiona para expandir...
Simple. I'm not running around calling forum members who disagree with me lolcows... unlike some here who think I am because I think Chupp is a lolcow in the making and share that opinion.

Not any skin off my back if people disagree. It's them wasting their time and breathe. Though I suppose I wasted mine trying to do the same.
 
instythot dijo:
No. He sent a signal that he did not immediately see sufficient reasons to hear the case absent the stuff missing in Tv's late amended petition
Presiona para expandir...

You obviously haven't read or understood the word "hypothetically".

In the real world, Ty couldn't make out the number, but we know for a fact that there was damage.

I wrote about a hypothetical rather than a real situation where Vic did not suffer material damage in this particular case. Because Chris Slatosh took over all the material damage, renewing the broken contract again, etc. And without asking Vic for compensation for certain expenses.

That is, I proposed to consider not the real situation, but the situation in which there is no damage in dollars for Vic. In this situation, it turns out that it is normal to demand the termination of the contract, threatening to do something and then to carry out threats - if there is no contract termination and no material damage.
According to Chupp it does not fit under either of the two versions of TI (because, of course, looking at this example, others will not be afraid).

For me, it's about the same as saying that it's okay to threaten to kill or rape a person until you kill or rape them. I'm not saying that the punishment for both should be the same. But that's what I think the second version of TI is about. It's about the fact that after all this blackmail, even if the contract with Vic was fulfilled out of decency, he might not be offered a new one in the future.

Judge Chupp high standards of evidence are so high that in the real world TI with prospective contracts is almost impossible to prove.
 
Última edición:
Monkey Prick dijo:
He's had stuff end up in the court of appeals that's been reversed with an extraordinary appeal remedy. I think it's happened at least twice now. We're past the point of talking about those reviews.
Presiona para expandir...

others who have made that argument have posted the relevant evidence rather than blandly saying "wow what a bad guy". if you want a reasonable discussion, include facts to support your statements instead of relying on readers to sort through the hundreds of pages of salt generated in the last 24 hours to guess at what you're stating backs up your claims.

for the record, i agree with the sentiment on chupp, but only after reading the rulings from the court of appeals. i am just tired of the rampant speculation and unverified/unauthenticated claims made over and over in this forum lately. we can and should hold at least this thread to a higher standard than PULL.
 
Legioneer dijo:
You obviously haven't read or understood the word "hypothetically".

In the real world, Ty couldn't make out the number, but we know for a fact that there was damage.

I wrote about a hypothetical rather than a real situation where Vic did not suffer material damage in this particular case. Because Chris Slatosh took over all the material damage, renewing the broken contract again, etc. And without asking Vic for compensation for certain expenses.

That is, I proposed to consider not the real situation, but the situation in which there is no damage in dollars for Vic. In this situation, it turns out that it is normal to demand the termination of the contract, threatening to do something and then to carry out threats - if there is no contract termination and no material damage.
According to Chupp it does not fit under either of the two versions of TI (because, of course, looking at this example, others will not be afraid).

For me, it's about the same as saying that it's okay to threaten to kill or rape a person until you kill or rape them. I'm not saying that the punishment for both should be the same. But that's what I think the second version of TI is about. It's about the fact that after all this blackmail, even if the contract with Vic was fulfilled out of decency, he might not be offered a new one in the future.
Presiona para expandir...

You have obviously misused the word hypothetically. As Ty did not provide any damage amount and was not able to show that potential business existed, your "hypothetical" scenario is, in fact, the one the judge ruled on
 
instythot dijo:
You have obviously misused the word hypothetically. As Ty did not provide any damage amount and was not able to show that potential business existed, your "hypothetical" scenario is, in fact, the one the judge ruled on
Presiona para expandir...

And that's literally what I told you. It's wrong.

Especially since Ty couldn't subpoena all the owners of all conventions at this stage (TCPA).
So he couldn't force them to testify. And demanding, as Chupp demanded, that they write affidavits of their own free will is bullshit.
 
Legioneer dijo:
You obviously haven't read or understood the word "hypothetically".

In the real world, Ty couldn't make out the number, but we know for a fact that there was damage.

I wrote about a hypothetical rather than a real situation where Vic did not suffer material damage in this particular case. Because Chris Slatosh took over all the material damage, renewing the broken contract again, etc. And without asking Vic for compensation for certain expenses.

That is, I proposed to consider not the real situation, but the situation in which there is no damage in dollars for Vic. In this situation, it turns out that it is normal to demand the termination of the contract, threatening to do something and then to carry out threats - if there is no contract termination and no material damage.
According to Chupp it does not fit under either of the two versions of TI (because, of course, looking at this example, others will not be afraid).

For me, it's about the same as saying that it's okay to threaten to kill or rape a person until you kill or rape them. I'm not saying that the punishment for both should be the same. But that's what I think the second version of TI is about. It's about the fact that after all this blackmail, even if the contract with Vic was fulfilled out of decency, he might not be offered a new one in the future.

Judge Chupp high standards of evidence are so high that in the real world TI with prospective contracts is almost impossible to prove.
Presiona para expandir...
You clearly don’t get it. You are wrong on so many points

There were measurable damages Ty could have presented, and the judge asked for specifically at the hearing. How much did the extra security cost? How much did being moved locations cost him?

Slatosch DID NOT eat the cost of the damages, Vic did.

The court can’t and won’t do anything about a breach of contract if there are no measurable damages for that breach.

The court can’t and won’t do anything about interference with The other conventions if it doesn’t have proof the other conventions were interfered with. Based on what Ty presented Chupp ruled it was impossible to say that the loss came from an unproven conspiracy vs, the defamatory statements.

You are out of your depth.
 
instythot dijo:
You have obviously misused the word hypothetically. As Ty did not provide any damage amount and was not able to show that potential business existed, your "hypothetical" scenario is, in fact, the one the judge ruled on
Presiona para expandir...
He shouldn't be showing damages at the TCPA stage, Chupp seems to have skipped over that and gone straight to trial levels of evidence.
 
Legioneer dijo:
And that's literally what I told you. It's wrong.

Especially since Ty couldn't subpoena all the owners of all conventions at this stage (TCPA).
So he couldn't force them to testify. And demanding, as Chupp demanded, that they write affidavits of their own free will is bullshit.
Presiona para expandir...

You are taking this, very rapidly, down to the first stop on the stupid train. The judge isn't sending a signal for anything more than "I couldn't find a prima facie case with what was in front of me after the late stuff was thrown out", and possibly it sends a signal to future victims of a similar circumstance "Hey, go in with a stronger and more polished prima facie case if you have a TCPA motion to contend with"

As we used to say to Bryan Dunn all the time, chill out man.
 
Imperial Agent dijo:
You clearly don’t get it. You are wrong on so many points


The court can’t and won’t do anything about a breach of contract if there are no measurable damages for that breach.

The court can’t and won’t do anything about interference with The other conventions if it doesn’t have proof the other conventions were interfered with. Based on what Ty presented Chupp ruled it was impossible to say that the loss came from an unproven conspiracy vs, the defamatory statements.

You are out of your depth.
Presiona para expandir...
And here lays the crux of Chupps flawed logic, how are you supposed to show damages for TI while there's a discovery stay in place? Chupp asked for information that goes beyond what is required for the TCPA. Once discovery begins and plaintiff still can't prove Ti then Chupp dismissing it makes complete sense.
 
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo