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

[plush]

Are they over their word limit? I read they that get 27,000 for everything. Is the response to Rial and Toye's appeal on the attorney's fees counted separately?

The opening brief was 11,571 words.
The reply to Rial and Toye was 5,722 words.
The response to Rial and Toye was 5,501 words.
The reply to Marchi was ____ words. (est 6,000)
The reply to Funimation was ??? words (est 5,000)

 

[GenericReviewerDraco]

Ty's work is really sloppy. They get the point across I agree, but man, I don't think Ty was made to handle these type of cases (that and the 11th hour bullshit). Doesn't really help that no one could help Vic in a timely manner.

 

[Adach_Ame]

Ty's work is really sloppy. They get the point across I agree, but man, I don't think Ty was made to handle these type of cases (that and the 11th hour bullshit). Doesn't really help that no one could help Vic in a timely manner.

To be fair though, no one is made to handle a three ring circus like the defense side is.

 

[AnOminous]

Are they over their word limit? I read they that get 27,000 for everything. Is the response to Rial and Toye's appeal on the attorney's fees counted separately?

The opening brief was 11,571 words.
The reply to Rial and Toye was 5,722 words.
The response to Rial and Toye was 5,501 words.
The reply to Marchi was ____ words. (est 6,000)
The reply to Funimation was ??? words (est 5,000)

Ver archivo adjunto 1396458
Ver archivo adjunto 1396460
Ver archivo adjunto 1396462
Ver archivo adjunto 1396463

The cross-appeal (MoRon v. Vic on fees) is a different case for purposes of word count. ETA: I'm pretty sure this is wrong. It would have been true prior to the 2012 amendment of the rules because the word limits were on a by brief basis so cross appeals would effectively raise the word count to a maximum of 45,000 (with limits on each brief) but the aggregate word count limit now strictly applies as 27,000 words. Source: https://appealsplus.com/wp-content/...ndle-Cross-Appeals-Article-Corrected-copy.pdf

 

[TheClappening]

Now the question is, where does this go from here? Do the appellees get their own round of sur replies? Or do we get to the scheduling of the oral arguments.

And when will we find out who the three appeals judges will be? I'm curious if we'll see judges (one is still serving, but I think Lee Gabriel is getting replaced by the troll-face attorney next cycle) who slapped Chupp with a mandamus.

 

[AnOminous]

Now the question is, where does this go from here? Do the appellees get their own round of sur replies? Or do we get to the scheduling of the oral arguments.

Yes. If they get around to them in time.

Anything from here on out is a sur-reply.

First, MoRon can file a sur-reply to Vic's sur-reply to the main appeal.
Then can file a sur-reply to Vic's reply to their opening brief on fees. And Vic could file another sur-reply to that.
Marchi and Funimation can file sur-replies to the sur-replies of Vic.

I don't know how many words they have left if any. I'll add it up when we see the revised Funimation sur-reply.

It rarely goes out past opening --> response --> sur-reply --> sur-reply. These generally get shorter as the parties have fewer words. It's also generally improper to introduce new material in a sur-reply so I expect MoRon to try something of the sort in their final document.

 

[TheClappening]

It's also generally improper to introduce new material in a sur-reply so I expect MoRon to try something of the sort in their final document.

I see what you did there.

The one serious grammatical error, in the Funi filing page 8:

I'm assuming the defense is frothing at the mouth to use that (though according to @Svetlana Funi's got refiled to correct defects and errors, so that's probably also fixed) to show that Vic has conceded being a public figure. Assuming that this is not corrected, can Vic's team be all "lol forgot to proofread," especially since all other filings have denied Vic being a public figure?

 

[AnOminous]

I'm assuming the defense is frothing at the mouth to use that (though according to @Svetlana Funi's got refiled to correct defects and errors, so that's probably also fixed) to show that Vic has conceded being a public figure. Assuming that this is not corrected, can Vic's team be all "lol forgot to proofread," especially since all other filings have denied Vic being a public figure?

It's a "scrivener's error" and will be disregarded.

 

[Laundui_or_douchette?]

It's a "scrivener's error" and will be disregarded.

Yep, it is used as a dunking by lawtwitter and bemoaned by the normal reader, but for the courts, they will just say “we know what you meant, we are human and spelling misteaks happen”

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

>get two months worth of extensions
>still together a document at the last minute
>lead counsel doesn't bother to help since he's just getting drunk on livestream chatting about vidya AGAIN

The people cheering Ty Beard on here as just as laughable as Law Twitter.

Ty's work is really sloppy. They get the point across I agree, but man, I don't think Ty was made to handle these type of cases (that and the 11th hour bullshit). Doesn't really help that no one could help Vic in a timely manner.

The only good thing Ty and his firm have done in this case is PR since he does good livestreams with Nick, who is the ultimate PR for Vic. Ty is the one to blame when Vic loses a case that should've been easily winnable since he's an estates lawyer who doesn't take these types of cases.

I just don't get how Ty and his firm have been around for so long, have so many experience lawyers, and deal with these huge corporate mergers and oil baron clients yet look like incompetent morons time after time on this case. Like "so bad the only reason they aren't total laughing stocks is because the other side's lawyer is a vindictive one-lunged cripple with a violent sociopath for a client" bad.

 

[Adach_Ame]

So on a scale of 1 to 10, how is this filing? 1 being the dumpster fire that was the second amended petition goof up. 10 being basically flawless, which is not what this is. And 5 being a bland document. I'm going with a 6 of "it's not great, but it's not a dumpster fire" in that it wasn't a complete shitshow but it is very messy.

 

[teriyakiburns]

So on a scale of 1 to 10, how is this filing? 1 being the dumpster fire that was the second amended petition goof up. 10 being basically flawless, which is not what this is. And 5 being a bland document. I'm going with a 6 of "it's not great, but it's not a dumpster fire" in that it wasn't a complete shitshow but it is very messy.

5 or 6, if the funi one is fixed.

 

[AnOminous]

So on a scale of 1 to 10, how is this filing? 1 being the dumpster fire that was the second amended petition goof up. 10 being basically flawless, which is not what this is. And 5 being a bland document. I'm going with a 6 of "it's not great, but it's not a dumpster fire" in that it wasn't a complete shitshow but it is very messy.

The direct reply on the fees brief was an 8. Very solid, well argued, even decently formatted. The sur-replies were a mess. I'd outright flunk the Funi one since the court would have literally thrown it out for missing necessary parts. If that's fixed (and allegedly it is) it's about a 5. Marchi's is about a 5. The sur-reply to MoRon is about a 6.5.

 

[TurboNAS]

I’ve learned a lot watching this case unfold.

• Don’t sue anyone, ever. You don’t have the money to blow on a lawsuit
• Strip mall lawyers are a first choice for getting your case processed in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Be wary of experts and law firms
• Ask to read every document before it’s filed. You don’t want sloppy work messing up your case
• Take a tip from the farms and Archive Everything.

I can see why people hire big firms - more lawyers must mean more legal power behind your case. They certainly do very well on the public relations front. But for all the bluster and bravado from the different firms it’s Sam Johnson who seems like the best option for us regular folks. He argues his case well and now his modest fees are being accepted as expert testimony on how much this kind of defense should cost.

Does Sam have a Twitter? Maybe that’s his secret, his brain isn’t poisoned by social media.

 

[East_Clintwood]

How many times has Nick stated on his show that imperfect paperwork rarely sinks cases?

Rarely != never and considering that
A) this appeal is Vic's last chance, and
B) there's no reason for these mistakes given how long they've had to polish them, I think some criticism is perfectly fair.
Sure the judges will probably let it slide, but why risk the sloppy filings affecting them (even subconsciously) when there's no real reason to?

 

[Youtube Celery]

I really am tired of the ugly messes that keep getting filed. If Vic wins this case I have no doubt it will be because the defendants hung themselves rather than being due to top tier lawyering.

While none of these filings are egregious in nature it would be nice to see the same amount of effort Ty puts into his fart huffing appearances on stream put in leading this suit.

 

[Friend computer]

I really am tired of the ugly messes that keep getting filed. If Vic wins this case I have no doubt it will be because the defendants hung themselves rather than being due to top tier lawyering.

While none of these filings are egregious in nature it would be nice to see the same amount of effort Ty puts into his fart huffing appearances on stream put in leading this suit.

And then getting on Nicks stream and gloats about how good the documents are, and getting dangerously drunk.

 

[Spectre_06]

The direct reply on the fees brief was an 8. Very solid, well argued, even decently formatted. The sur-replies were a mess. I'd outright flunk the Funi one since the court would have literally thrown it out for missing necessary parts. If that's fixed (and allegedly it is) it's about a 5. Marchi's is about a 5. The sur-reply to MoRon is about a 6.5.

I'd have to agree with this. COVID might provide an excuse as to why it took so long, but having the extra two months certainly allowed them time to do drafts, proofread, redraft, re-proofread, and then file the final documents. There would likely still be typos and grammatical issues (because what document doesn't have small ones?) but it wouldn't be as egregious as some of them found in these. That being said, the sur-replies aren't exactly necessary, since it will likely be oral arguments, but it does help the judges to narrow down to specific facts they may wish to questions the parties on. It's helpful, and while I don't expect there will be issues with the filings in the Court's eyes I can certainly see why people might be a bit upset with the quality of the work.

I suppose, though, we can chalk that up to the word limits and the like.

 

[Dumb Bitch Smoothie]

Ty and co could quite literally get someone autistic enough to nitpick and revise every last detail to make sure it is 100% ready to go. Seriously. They could get someone to clean up their shit easily...

But they don't.

 

[Nekoi.Inukuma.00]

I’ve learned a lot watching this case unfold.

• Don’t sue anyone, ever. You don’t have the money to blow on a lawsuit
• Strip mall lawyers are a first choice for getting your case processed in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Be wary of experts and law firms
• Ask to read every document before it’s filed. You don’t want sloppy work messing up your case
• Take a tip from the farms and Archive Everything.

I can see why people hire big firms - more lawyers must mean more legal power behind your case. They certainly do very well on the public relations front. But for all the bluster and bravado from the different firms it’s Sam Johnson who seems like the best option for us regular folks. He argues his case well and now his modest fees are being accepted as expert testimony on how much this kind of defense should cost.

Does Sam have a Twitter? Maybe that’s his secret, his brain isn’t poisoned by social media.

This. All of this. Lawsuits should be an avenue of last resort, or an attempt at full on M.A.D. A small competent law firm is worth way more than the junior partner from huge firm, you really only hire a huge firm if your a huge corp involved in complex litigation, or you need the clout in a negotiation... and from what I've seen isn't that second reason isn't usually worth it.

I've been involved in litigation once or twice, and that third point is spot on. Proofread everything. You may not understand it all at first, but that will actually help you catch stupid mistakes. Familiarizing yourself with your own damn case is really useful if you ever have to go before a judge. Understanding what your lawyer is doing is really useful in setting expectations and getting a desired outcome.

On top of archive everything, if your opponent in the lawsuit has ever had any involvement with the law, get really familiar with the court records system. I saved a lot of money on dirt digging by having friends and family members do some of the opposition research for me. On the flipside, lower your internet footprint, because if they have the time god knows they'll do the same or if they have deep pockets hire a PI to return the favor.

Bringing it back around to the case at hand, that last bit has been really important to the lawsuit and especially the related PR campaigns: the defendants and potential witnesses have a hell of an internet footprint, and many of the parties have some past cases to be dug up for PR purposes.