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

[Hoss]

Bob..I hate to tell you this..but your memory IS borking. You aren't my uncle.

Seriously though, Vic was fired without any paperwork it seems. Nick implied this technically could mean that they didn't fire him at all if no paperwork was fired which I think might lead to a contract violation. But Nick only implied this and didn't elaborate any further on it. Most likely for legal reasons, but it could have also just been for speculatory reasons too.

I think prudence dictates he never got it because it would have been in the paperwork in the original suit. I don't believe it was.

 

[General Relativity QM]

I assume that Vic has a copy of his contract to make any arguments about failure to abide by the contract.

However, it makes me wonder what kind of shenanigans that Funimation might have pulled behind closed doors, and intra-company (inter-company with Sony) communications that would help BHBH establish the prima facie case for defamation and TI, along with the investigation report and a deposition of the investigator.

It seems that some form of limited discovery is needed to truly answer the TCPA motion. Otherwise, this seems like a motion to summary judgement on the pleadings, and it forces the plaintiff to prove their case before they can potentially get the evidence to make their case in discovery. It seems the plaintiff basically has to win the case before they can even gather the information needed to win the case. I get that Texas is trying to reduce the cost of litigation and discourage frivolous suits. But man, it seems that Funimation is holding the most important information, and as Hoss quite rightly points out, they haven't been very forth right with their affirmative defenses.

I guess they are hoping that BHBH will not be able to conduct any discovery and fail to make the prima facie case (perhaps because they were unable to do discovery). A TCPA motion would be dismissed with prejudice if I recall correctly. Funimation would not be able to be sued again if they prevail at TCPA and subsequent discovery for the other defendants gives BHBH what they needed to have defeated the TCPA.

It seems that the defendants have been playing games with the discovery in order to withhold from Vic what he needs to prevail at TCPA. It is frustrating to see the law abused in such a way. Discovery was not meant to be abused as it has been by defendants. "We're not going to answer that until you agree to do what we want you to do!" What is significantly different than saying, "We're not going to answer that until you agree not to use this information at trial!" I see no difference in what the defendants have said and this example.

I'm sure BHBH have a plan, but man, it sucks waiting and thinking that these jokers might get away with this because of their gamesmanship rather than let the trier of fact render a judgement with all relevant information. If Vic lost and defendants were honorable in their actions in court, I'd disagree with the jury, but I'd say that Vic had his day. I'd move on and support Vic in other ways. However, this gamesmanship is not giving me the sense that Vic is having his day in court, and I think that ultimately hurts everyone involved.

 

[DragoonSierra]

They're not actually being sued for breach of contract. An interesting thing about the TI cause of action in Texas is the actual termination of the contract need not be a wrongful act and TI can exist even if the contract expressly allows it to be canceled by the party who did so, and even if they had already decided to terminate it, so long as the actual termination has not yet occurred and up until the instant it does.

What do you think about the clause that says he has do be terminated in writing if its for cause?

 

[AnOminous]

Funimation could easily seal the TCPA by putting the letters and investigation file into their evidence, considering how much they could be on the hook for.

You would think they'd already have done this.

I mean, if there actually was a report. Which you'd expect to exist. If there was a real investigation.

What do you think about the clause that says he has do be terminated in writing if its for cause?

He's not suing over it so I don't know if it matters. It's pretty clownish and unprofessional, though.

 

[Hoss]

You would think they'd already have done this.

I mean, if there actually was a report. Which you'd expect to exist. If there was a real investigation.

They WOULD have if they actually did file any paperwork. It's sounding like they didn't even follow their own procedures. If the Investigation exists (which has been verified through affidavits), then there ought to be paperwork on the subject hmm? That's not being produced nor has his Severance Notice for Cause documentation. This is HR 101 shit and they can't get the BASICS correct.

 

[RodgerDodger]

A few questions:

-Since there was an investigation per the TCPA, there has to be a report of the investigation, right? Why wasn't the report part of their evidence? If memory serves, the investigation has to be kept in a investigation specific file (not the persons main employee record,) just in case such harassment goes to trial. In the US, they have to keep that investigation file for a while. It would be real easy to make the TCPA go through if the file was part of the evidence. Unless they didn't do it, and there was collusion and malice. *pikachu shock face*

-Again if memory serves me, there must be a formal letter that they are being investigated produced by HR, or a letter saying a complaint was filed given to the accused as soon as possible after the complaint is filed. There also has to be a formal letter showing the results of the investigation. Both have to be served to the person accused in a fashion they can present evidence to the investigation, and they have the right to bring in an attorney. The letters have to be signed by the person accused so they acknowledge the investigation and results. Where is the paper trail?

I ponder this as someone who had to file paperwork for actual harassment, and they tried to metoo me. It is an extensive paperwork trail that involves a lot of US Federal laws to comply too, even if they're a contract worker.

Funimation could easily seal the TCPA by putting the letters and investigation file into their evidence, considering how much they could be on the hook for. If there is no paperwork, then either their HR is shit (and not in compliance with US law,) or they are fucking lying like cheap rugs.

Place your bets, folks.

If I missed the discussion of this, or if my memory is borking out on me, please let me know.

You would think they'd already have done this.

I mean, if there actually was a report. Which you'd expect to exist. If there was a real investigation.

Interesting questions, aren't they. I can only think of one set of circumstances where no report would be generated or filed. And that was if the investigation was "unfounded". As in the investigator found it all completely idiotic. So much so that to even generate a paper trail would be to needlessly damage the employee. Hmmm? "Unfounded" we've heard that word before somewhere? Now where was it?

Granted that assumes some form of functioning HR, which Funi clearly did not have. But we see an awful lot of double speak in that TCPA, don't we. "Based on Ms. Denbow's investigation I concluded that we should terminate Mr. Mignogna". Isn't that a fascinating sentence. It leads you to believe one thing, while never actually saying it. Gee, haven't we seen a lot of that here. Note that it never defines, or describes Ms. Denbow's conclusions. It does not say "based on Ms. Denbow's report". It does not say a whole lotta things, but it leaves the reader thinking Denbow found really bad shit about the Plaintiff, now doesn't it?

 

[Hoss]

Interesting questions, aren't they. I can only think of one set of circumstances where no report would be generated or filed. And that was if the investigation was "unfounded". As in the investigator found it all completely idiotic. So much so that to even generate a paper trail would be to needlessly damage the employee. Hmmm? "Unfounded" we've heard that word before somewhere? Now where was it?

Granted that assumes some form of functioning HR, which Funi clearly did not have. But we see an awful lot of double speak in that TCPA, don't we. "Based on Ms. Denbow's investigation I concluded that we should terminate Mr. Mignogna". Isn't that a fascinating sentence. It leads you to believe one thing, while never actually saying it. Gee, haven't we seen a lot of that here. Note that it never defines, or describes Ms. Denbow's conclusions. It does not say "based on Ms. Denbow's report". It does not say a whole lotta things, but it leaves the reader thinking Denbow found really bad shit about the Plaintiff, now doesn't it?

It's a Hearsay Horseshit Hysteria. If they actually pull a "The printer was broken" defense I'd see to it to retrieve said papers, especially his severance TIME STAMPED on the day of his termination.

 

[Facts Over Feels]

You would think they'd already have done this.

I mean, if there actually was a report.

What are the odds to that Funi was looking for an excuse (any excuse would do) to get rid of Vic and had Sony investigate. Step 2 was when Denbow made the 4 phone calls that her "investigation" consisted of and when she had a few as of yet unsupported accusations Funi decided that was the excuse they needed and jumped the gun and fired Vic before Denbow could complete a proper investigation and forced Sony/Denbow in cya mode. Why else would a company as big as Sony have zero paperwork on this?

 

[Cakeisjustok]

Granted that assumes some form of functioning HR, which Funi clearly did not have.

Yeah but isn't it Sony's HR? A company of that size would have set criteria for an HR investigation. Documentation would be the first thing in any form of investigation, if there is no paper trail, and I mean you would have to have written statements from each witness and Vic for each instance, if that doesn't exist then there is no investigation.

That it isn't in the TCPA and instead they included a bunch of articles and other crap is pretty interesting.

 

[PrinceofAllCucks]

Yeah but isn't it Sony's HR? A company of that size would have set criteria for an HR investigation. Documentation would be the first thing in any form of investigation, if there is no paper trail, and I mean you would have to have written statements from each witness and Vic for each instance, if that doesn't exist then there is no investigation.

That it isn't in the TCPA and instead they included a bunch of articles and other crap is pretty interesting.

Remember who actually fired Vic though. Even if they do have the paper trail for the investigation, Funimation is the one who fired him. They haven't provided any documentation that would be required for a proper termination notice, looping right back to the theory of Funimation just itching to pull the trigger on Vic so badly that they didn't follow any proper procedure.

 

[General Relativity QM]

Of course, all they would include is stuff to which Vic already has access. If they gave him something of substance, it might help him defeat TCPA. Making Vic prepare his response with only the things they can spin and hope that they get the TCPA ruling. If a judge sees that they just listened and believed, it might not be a good look for them.

 

[AnOminous]

It's a Hearsay Horseshit Hysteria. If they actually pull a "The printer was broken" defense I'd see to it to retrieve said papers, especially his severance TIME STAMPED on the day of his termination.

My theories are either that no report exists at all because essentially no real investigation was conducted. Or the report is so woefully inadequate that producing it would wreck their case. Or the report exists, literally exonerates Vic, and says something terrible like they flat out know he's innocent but are firing him anyway, for instance, to keep MoRon and Marchi happy.

 

[Hoss]

My theories are either that no report exists at all because essentially no real investigation was conducted. Or the report is so woefully inadequate that producing it would wreck their case. Or the report exists, literally exonerates Vic, and says something terrible like they flat out know he's innocent but are firing him anyway, for instance, to keep MoRon and Marchi happy.

Let me be crystal clear on this. I have two guesses why both the investigation documents and his severance notice are not present.

1. Denial of Unemployment Benefits

This shit right here is sorta common in scummy HR departments and I'm willing to bet the docs aren't there because Funimation doesn't want to give Vic a "Blanket" severance. They want him to be DENIED Unemployment without explaining why. In other words "he's still contracted with Funimation but has no pay and no severance". Not only does this prevent him from potentially getting unemployment, it doesn't even consider "Suspended Without Pay". In other words, he's stuck if this is true. To Sever him unconditionally would require his severance which would grant him the opportunity to file for Unemployment (and they don't want that). To Sever him with Cause would require they present the investigation documents and state the EXACT reason he is being terminated. (Which through Soyny's HR Affidavit we know absolutely happened). So if they didn't adequately sever his contract, they did it deliberately to deny him unemployment. I sorta recall a Glassdoor review that said they typically did this.

2. Exposing Proof of Workplace Retaliation

Using HR as a weapon to get rid of employees they simply don't like or have a vendetta with is a scummy practice that is as common as a sunrise. The "Conspiracy" here is simply put. Execute this plan and sever Vic without Cause but IMPLY Cause through Hearsay. This is illegal as shit. So simply put the documents DON'T exist but the Affidavits do. They don't exist because it completely kills their fucking case. Provide the Severance with Cause and it shows the """Investigation""" which we already have access to is a complete fucking farce. Once they provide the Investigation Documentation (Which I honestly believe doesn't exist, the Affidavit IS the investigation [which isn't a fucking investigation, it's a feasibility report to say if an investigation is merited] it's gonna be loaded with fuck all and a goddamn jellybean story that is like a quadruple entendre. I'm sure that HR agent recorded her conversations....if she didn't she's just a fucking idiot. This theory right here is actually worse because it's using HR to "Retaliate" against Vic for any goddamn reason, and if it was TRULY because of his religion then they violated Title VII. Both are Federal Laws that even "At-Will" employers have to follow.

 

[Wake me up]

how do you show state of mind?

By flashing 400 tweets on a Power Point presentation, one by one, in front of a Texas jury. You'll have proven malice before you hit 50.

Before you hit 200, the jury will be trying to pay you to stop so they can go get a rope to hang the guy with, for making them endure the sort of inhuman torture which is having to read and pay attention to Ron Soye's tweets.

Wouldn't be surprised if the jury sue him for causing emotional distress and damages after the trial is over!

 

[Loose Handle]

Before you hit 200, the jury will be trying to pay you to stop so they can go get a rope to hang the guy with, for making them endure the sort of inhuman torture which is having to read and pay attention to Ron Soye's tweets.

Now why would anyone have a problem reading hundreds of tweets written like this

 

[Soviras]

1. In granting all inferences to the plaintiff, would this include the most favorable interpretation of Vic's public figure status? Would BHBH have to make 3 prima facie cases for each state, wait for the court to rule on his status, or give him the most favorable status for the TCPA, which is about frivolity (a question of public status is not important in determining frivolity)?

2. If actual malice is required to be shown in TCPA, in general, how would one do that without some discovery?

3. If multiple parties make a TCPA motion, where A says that B is the responsible party and B says A is the responsibile party where A and B are both defending against a suit brought by C, would this be sufficient to make a prima facie case since all parties agree at least one of the defendants is responsible, therefore there is no frivolity in the suit?

4. Can discovery abuse be used as grounds to get discovery that was required before the TCPA discovery stay? Can discovery abuse be used as circumstantial evidence of common malice in a suit where actual malice is a required element?

1. BHBH would need to prepare for two scenarios at minimum. There is no need to differentiate between PF and LPPF, as the effect on the case would be the same. The court doesn't need to give the most favorable status to him during the TCPA, but the court will probably take both scenarios into account. Only if the TCPA would succeed or fail based on the Public Figure status, will the court actually need to decide his status at that point.

2. They only need a prima facie case for the TCPA, not absolute evidence. If they can show it's likely that actual malice might exist, they can overcome that hurdle.

3. That could suffice, yes. It can, theoretically, go even further; the defendants can even respond to each others TCPA with information and arguments to undermine each other. Rather uncommon though, but if it's in the defendants best interests to do so they can (and considering Funi has the money, the others have a reason to want Funi to stick around).

4. Discovery abuse can be grounds for that, yes. And yes, discovery abuse can be used as circumstantial evidence malice which in turn can be circumstantial evidence of actual malice. It wouldn't suffice on it's own though.

-Since there was an investigation per the TCPA, there has to be a report of the investigation, right? Why wasn't the report part of their evidence? If memory serves, the investigation has to be kept in a investigation specific file (not the persons main employee record,) just in case such harassment goes to trial. In the US, they have to keep that investigation file for a while. It would be real easy to make the TCPA go through if the file was part of the evidence. Unless they didn't do it, and there was collusion and malice. *pikachu shock face*

-Again if memory serves me, there must be a formal letter that they are being investigated produced by HR, or a letter saying a complaint was filed given to the accused as soon as possible after the complaint is filed. There also has to be a formal letter showing the results of the investigation. Both have to be served to the person accused in a fashion they can present evidence to the investigation, and they have the right to bring in an attorney. The letters have to be signed by the person accused so they acknowledge the investigation and results. Where is the paper trail?

There probably was a report, but it's probably not favorable to their case. Sony has the report, Funimation might not. The formal letters weren't sent to Vic, it's not part of Sony's procedures, but part of Texas' guidelines. This means that in Texas, the investigation might not hold up, no matter what the outcome was, but that's something for the court to decide.

 

[Super Smelly Vagina]

They WOULD have if they actually did file any paperwork. It's sounding like they didn't even follow their own procedures. If the Investigation exists (which has been verified through affidavits), then there ought to be paperwork on the subject hmm? That's not being produced nor has his Severance Notice for Cause documentation. This is HR 101 shit and they can't get the BASICS correct.

If you listen to certain interviews with Chris Sabat, he reveals that he has a lot of power and involvement with the inner workings of Funimation. He has said that Monica is one of his best friends. Sabat has implied he let Stephanie Nadolny go becuase of getting DUI's. So It wouldn't be a far stretch to say that Sabat, Rial, Schemmel etc could to an extent flex their "muscle" to act as puppet masters for Funimation. If there is documentation of the investigation, it most likely a piss poor attempt to put a more proper veneer on top of "Fuck this guy, I don't like him." Shortly after Vic was fired, Sabat made a tweet to the effect of "my actions were justified," Maybe his "actions" had something to do with the sham investigation. That would explain why Monica and others freaked out so bad when questioned about Vic. "How dare you question our investigation, it was perfect in every way and chiseled out of 99.9% pure gold." They are protesting too much.
If Monica has about as much power as Sabat, it should be easy to consider her an agent of Funimation. As far as Soye's actions go, having your spouse or relative do your dirty work while you claim innocence is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

Of course, all they would include is stuff to which Vic already has access. If they gave him something of substance, it might help him defeat TCPA. Making Vic prepare his response with only the things they can spin and hope that they get the TCPA ruling. If a judge sees that they just listened and believed, it might not be a good look for them.

Couldn't that intentional vagueness be used against them. You don't just get to claim you have a winning hand, you have to show the winning cards. It's time to show their cards but they're not doing it.

 

[Cakeisjustok]

Any ideas when BHBH is going to amend their pleading or do they just submit an answer to the TCPA? I know it has been stated there will be a hearing first week in August but just curious what we should expect before that.

 

[vRick]

Any ideas when BHBH is going to amend their pleading or do they just submit an answer to the TCPA? I know it has been stated there will be a hearing first week in August but just curious what we should expect before that.

From what I remember Nick saying on stream, BHBH would probably submit a response within a few days or so. https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/CP/htm/CP.27.htm - Doesn't stipulate a required time to respond (just timings on the required hearing after TCPA is filed) but quick googling shows you probably should file a response fairly timely after the other party files for a TCPA motion. IANAL.

 

[AnOminous]

Let me be crystal clear on this. I have two guesses why both the investigation documents and his severance notice are not present.

1. Denial of Unemployment Benefits

This shit right here is sorta common in scummy HR departments and I'm willing to bet the docs aren't there because Funimation doesn't want to give Vic a "Blanket" severance.

Funimation is notorious for doing this to employees but Vic wasn't an employee. He was a contractor. They vindictively fuck over their wage slaves like this as a matter of routine though, after firing them for no reason.

Maybe his "actions" had something to do with the sham investigation. That would explain why Monica and others freaked out so bad when questioned about Vic. "How dare you question our investigation, it was perfect in every way and chiseled out of 99.9% pure gold."

And yet this case winning absolutely golden document is nowhere to be seen, and they don't even explicitly say that it even exists at all. Imagine Tammi Denbow actually said this all looks pretty dicey, wrote an ass covering memo, and then got told to fire the guy anyway.