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

[HTTP Error 404]

But if it goes to appeals, it could go up to half a mil, no? I wonder if he'll do it.

Only if the Court of Appeals oks that, which to an outsider layperson seems... odd.

Vic absolutely has the right to appeal anything he wants to appeal.

The Judge is basically saying "If you dare appeal my decision I'm doubling your fees."

That seems like the sort of thing that the CoA would reject out of hand.

Of course, we're in a case where one of the Lawyers demanded the Judge simply refuse to let Vic appeal in the first place, so who knows what kind of clown world bullshit we're dealing with.

 

[I can't imagine]

Only if the Court of Appeals oks that, which to an outsider layperson seems... odd.

Vic absolutely has the right to appeal anything he wants to appeal.

The Judge is basically saying "If you dare appeal my decision I'm doubling your fees."

That seems like the sort of thing that the CoA would reject out of hand.

Of course, we're in a case where one of the Lawyers demanded the Judge simply refuse to let Vic appeal in the first place, so who knows what kind of clown world bullshit we're dealing with.

It's pretty standard in a decision on attorney's fees for the judge to make an estimate on the amount of attorney's fees he expects an appeal to cost the winning party. Obviously it can be appealed, but it's hardly an unusual thing for him to do; on the contrary, since he knows the losing party intends to appeal, it would be expected.

 

[MadPanda]

Of course, we're in a case where one of the Lawyers demanded the Judge simply refuse to let Vic appeal in the first place, so who knows what kind of clown world bullshit we're dealing with.

I had no idea about this. No wonder the judge seemed adamant to make sure the court recognized vics right to appeal and ensured that he could. The judge even trying to deny someones right to appeal could spell trouble that would probably make a writ of mandamus a slap on the wrist.

 

[BigDuckEnergy]

True. But if the appeals court overturns some of the rulings that would be less he would have to pay.

Seems like there are a lot of variables to try and guess what is going to happen. Probably better just to roll the dice and see what happens.

Meh, I'll say it boils down to 4 options.

Option 1: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, and Vic has to pay the half million.

Option 2: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, but rule that he can't levy additional fees for appealing and he pays the quarter million.

Option 3: The appeals overturn some causes of action, Vic will pay less than the quarter million accordingly, and the case goes ahead.

Option 4: The appeals overturn all causes of action, and the case goes ahead.

I would put money on option 3 just because of the Slatosch texts alone, but Marchi's inclusion always being weak, they will more than likely find Vic a public figure meaning defamation is most likely out, qand the civil conspiracy will be hard to show even if it is true.

 

[Dr. Geronimo]

Meh, I'll say it boils down to 4 options.

Option 1: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, and Vic has to pay the half million.

Option 2: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, but rule that he can't levy additional fees for appealing and he pays the quarter million.

Option 3: The appeals overturn some causes of action, Vic will pay less than the quarter million accordingly, and the case goes ahead.

Option 4: The appeals overturn all causes of action, and the case goes ahead.

I would put money on option 3 just because of the Slatosch texts alone, but Marchi's inclusion always being weak, they will more than likely find Vic a public figure meaning defamation is most likely out, qand the civil conspiracy will be hard to show even if it is true.

There's also an option 5 of: Appeals agrees with Chupp on all counts, denies the fees levy, and also disagrees with the fees that Chupp ordered.

I still think it's a damn shame that Marchi still has a chance of getting off clean. Would love to have her stupid mouth shut.

 

[TheClappening]

Meh, I'll say it boils down to 4 options.

Option 1: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, and Vic has to pay the half million.

Option 2: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, but rule that he can't levy additional fees for appealing and he pays the quarter million.

Option 3: The appeals overturn some causes of action, Vic will pay less than the quarter million accordingly, and the case goes ahead.

Option 4: The appeals overturn all causes of action, and the case goes ahead.

I would put money on option 3 just because of the Slatosch texts alone, but Marchi's inclusion always being weak, they will more than likely find Vic a public figure meaning defamation is most likely out, qand the civil conspiracy will be hard to show even if it is true.

I'm putting money on three as well, though I think Vic, even if declared a public figure, still has actual malice against Marchi because of Khan v Vanderlinden. I actually don't know if they have actual malice against Funimation without additional discovery.

I'm just hoping for at least one cause of action against each defendant. That would mean, even if Vic utterly fails before a jury, they get hit with legal expenses while Vic has the majority of his, if not all, paid for. And that would be funny.

 

[Urbanmech]

I'm putting money on three as well, though I think Vic, even if declared a public figure, still has actual malice against Marchi because of Khan v Vanderlinden. I actually don't know if they have actual malice against Funimation without additional discovery.

I'm just hoping for at least one cause of action against each defendant. That would mean, even if Vic utterly fails before a jury, they get hit with legal expenses while Vic has the majority of his, if not all, paid for. And that would be funny.

wouldn't the fact that Funi never corrected anyone responding to their tweets be enough for Malice?

 

[Padoru]

wouldn't the fact that Funi never corrected anyone responding to their tweets be enough for Malice?

i think the issue with actual malice on Funimation is that they never outright said that vic was fired for sexual harassment by word. The wording of what essentially was "We fired Vic" and "We don't condone harassment" made it incredibly apparent for anybody with half a braincell that they meant just that but we apparently need to assume that people can't think AT ALL when reading this which means "It wasn't said in this very way so it wasn't MEANT in that way"

 

[Urbanmech]

i think the issue with actual malice on Funimation is that they never outright said that vic was fired for sexual harassment by word. The wording of what essentially was "We fired Vic" and "We don't condone harassment" made it incredibly apparent for anybody with half a braincell that they meant just that but we apparently need to assume that people can't think AT ALL when reading this which means "It wasn't said in this very way so it wasn't MEANT in that way"

while I would say you were right but even Monica jumped on that tweet as he got fired for sexual harassment, hell a lot of KV ran with it as proof. I mean must have been almost impossible for Funi to clear up their meaning for months now...
Edit: and didn't one of the Funi affidavits say they monitor the internet and stuff so they knew what meaning was being implicated and did nothing.

 

[TheClappening]

i think the issue with actual malice on Funimation is that they never outright said that vic was fired for sexual harassment by word. The wording of what essentially was "We fired Vic" and "We don't condone harassment" made it incredibly apparent for anybody with half a braincell that they meant just that but we apparently need to assume that people can't think AT ALL when reading this which means "It wasn't said in this very way so it wasn't MEANT in that way"

You do have to take into account the assumptions of a reasonable. I've shown the February 11th tweet to a few people who have never heard of Thicc Lasagna or Funimation, and every person has said Funimation must have fired Vic for harassment of some sort.

Mentioned it to my mom, who's done court interpreting work (so she knows how trials sound), and she came to the same conclusion. When I told her Vic was suing Funimaiton, without telling her the causes of action, she immediately said "Oh, they defamed him!"

I think it's less that they didn't spell out "Vic was fired for harassment" in crayon, and more I don't know if Vic can prove knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard. I guess maybe the affidavits of Karen Mika and the Scott Baretto denying that they wanted the message to be taken that way versus the reasonable person's interpretation of the message might cut it? I dunno.

 

[Padoru]

while I would say you were right but even Monica jumped on that tweet as he got fired for sexual harassment, hell a lot of KV ran with it as proof. I mean must have been almost impossible for Funi to clear up their meaning for months now...
Edit: and didn't one of the Funi affidavits say they monitor the internet and stuff so they knew what meaning was being implicated and did nothing.

that's kinda what i mean though. MONICA said that was the case for sure. NOT Funimation. We know Funimation meant that as we read the tweet and have enough of an understanding of the english language to put this together. But they will run with the whole "Nah we never said that this way" as OneHandClapping pointed out in his response to this.

You do have to take into account the assumptions of a reasonable. I've shown the February 11th tweet to a few people who have never heard of Thicc Lasagna or Funimation, and every person has said Funimation must have fired Vic for harassment of some sort.

Mentioned it to my mom, who's done court interpreting work (so she knows how trials sound), and she came to the same conclusion. When I told her Vic was suing Funimaiton, without telling her the causes of action, she immediately said "Oh, they defamed him!"

I think it's less that they didn't spell out "Vic was fired for harassment" in crayon, and more I don't know if Vic can prove knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard. I guess maybe the affidavits of Karen Mika and the Scott Baretto denying that they wanted the message to be taken that way versus the reasonable person's interpretation of the message might cut it? I dunno.

I mean if somebody interprets the tweets as meaning this exact thing, which as i said anybody thinking about it would, reckless disregard is a given on this. Your mother hit it perfectly with her reaction there. The moment you have any understanding, or as in her case an extensive understanding, of what is happening in this shit there's no way NOT to see it as defamation since Vic would be a goddamn moron to sue over something that is provably true and claim the opposite, especially if an investigation has taken place. So the only way to interpret this any other way is to NOT think about it at all. It's certainly how Chupp approached it. He didn't give this claim the light of day and just waved it past.

 

[TheClappening]

I mean if somebody interprets the tweets as meaning this exact thing, which as i said anybody thinking about it would, reckless disregard is a given on this. Your mother hit it perfectly with her reaction there. The moment you have any understanding, or as in her case an extensive understanding, of what is happening in this shit there's no way NOT to see it as defamation since Vic would be a goddamn moron to sue over something that is provably true and claim the opposite, especially if an investigation has taken place. So the only way to interpret this any other way is to NOT think about it at all. It's certainly how Chupp approached it. He didn't give this claim the light of day and just waved it past.

@AnOminous or someone fact check me on this, but I I'm pretty sure that's not the right definition of reckless disregard for the truth.

It's not that they were reckless in how they said it, they were reckless in the sense that they had serious doubts about the truthfulness of the statement. There's an argument that Ron hits reckless disregard by indiscriminately believing every negative rumor about Vic on PULL. That said, there's also a rumor that counts as mere negligence, which doesn't beat public figure status.

Which, again, kind of gets twisted with the Mika and Barreto affidavits, but I dunno.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm putting money on three as well, though I think Vic, even if declared a public figure, still has actual malice against Marchi because of Khan v Vanderlinden.

Khan v. Van Der Linden involved a rather more specific allegation that the plaintiff specifically had stated he had funded a terrorist organization. That either happened or it didn't. This would clearly apply to Monica's allegations, which Vic flatly denies, and makes the trial court decision frankly bizarre.

The appeals court could find the plaintiff and Marchi simply characterized the same events differently, which at least in theory could be done without malice or negligently. I think there's an actual factual dispute but the appeals court might not.

@AnOminous or someone fact check me on this, but I I'm pretty sure that's not the right definition of reckless disregard for the truth.

It's not that they were reckless in how they said it, they were reckless in the sense that they had serious doubts about the truthfulness of the statement.

It's the latter, although malice has also been imputed when relying on sources that were clearly unreliable. It's not always possible to determine whether this is because they inferred the defendant could not have done this without the requisite state of mind or whether the recklessness itself could constitute malice (this would apply more to Toye than the defendants claiming personal experience).

 

[Spectre_06]

I think it's less that they didn't spell out "Vic was fired for harassment" in crayon

That's because crayons are for noms!

 

[Dildo Shwaggins]

He filed for appeal weeks ago, before Chupps ruling.

I thought he filed a Notice to Appeal back then, not an actual appeal (since Chupp hadn't ruled on sanctions and fees yet at the time)?

 

[diskboomer]

I thought he filed a Notice to Appeal back then, not an actual appeal (since Chupp hadn't ruled on sanctions and fees yet at the time)?

Esentially the same, they just hadn’t paid the fee to “perfect” it by the time of the November 8th hearing. They paid that after the hearing, and before the fees judgement.

It means when the final fees judgement hit, the appeal was perfected. Now they can go ahead and get the brief and motion done.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

That's because crayons are for noms!

Calm down marine

 

[Notspecialdude]

i think the issue with actual malice on Funimation is that they never outright said that vic was fired for sexual harassment by word. The wording of what essentially was "We fired Vic" and "We don't condone harassment" made it incredibly apparent for anybody with half a braincell that they meant just that but we apparently need to assume that people can't think AT ALL when reading this which means "It wasn't said in this very way so it wasn't MEANT in that way"

Their statement implied two things. The first was that Vic was fired for sexual harassment. The second was that this decision came through an investigation. I believe if there is a chance of funimation getting dragged back in, it would be through focusing on this statement of fact.

The TCPA prevented discovery, but the affidavits funimation submitted point to that investigation being the reason why he was fired, but the conclusions and results of that investigation were never given.

If the investigation indicated that the accusations of Vic held little to no merit, and funi fired Vic anyway then its a clear case of malice and intent to harm. And because this investigation is key evidence to this statement of fact, discovery of it would need to happen since funimation did not submit it themselves.

 

[2lolis1cup]

Meh, I'll say it boils down to 4 options.

Option 1: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, and Vic has to pay the half million.

Option 2: The appeals agree with Chupp on all counts, but rule that he can't levy additional fees for appealing and he pays the quarter million.

Option 3: The appeals overturn some causes of action, Vic will pay less than the quarter million accordingly, and the case goes ahead.

Option 4: The appeals overturn all causes of action, and the case goes ahead.

I would put money on option 3 just because of the Slatosch texts alone, but Marchi's inclusion always being weak, they will more than likely find Vic a public figure meaning defamation is most likely out, qand the civil conspiracy will be hard to show even if it is true.

Option 1: REEEing from ISWV on major scale

Option 2: REEEing from ISWV on a minor scale

Option 3: REEEing from KV on a major scale

Option 4: REEEing from KV off the scale

I agree option 3 is the most likely, but for the pure autistic salt I want option 4.

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

Option 1: REEEing from ISWV on major scale

Option 2: REEEing from ISWV on a minor scale

Option 3: REEEing from KV on a major scale

Option 4: REEEing from KV off the scale

I agree option 3 is the most likely, but for the pure autistic salt I want option 4.

I suppose the best option for maximum screeching from both sides would be for the appeal to be granted (at least in part), the case to go through discovery and then trial, and for the defendants to prevail after the sides are completely worn down.

More likely is a settlement with many of the players if things look like they're going all the way. But there are two defendants and their scrappy mosquito bitten lawyer that might be unable to cut their losses.