Lolcow Melinda Leigh Scott & Marshall Castersen - Sue-happy couple. Flat earth conspiracists. Pretending to be Jewish. Believe Kiwi Farms is protected by the Masonic Order. 0-6 on lawsuits. Marshall is dead.

Ah, so it got the Hungarian treatment then. I guess I need to brush up on my post WW2 history.

Edit: nick confirmed to be covering Mel stuff in his livestream as well as promoting Ridge wallets:


View attachment 2638148
View attachment 2638150
Hopefully Rackets can be entertaining tonight and not busting off to answer Superchats every goddamn 30 seconds.

I swear those are the most annoying thing to infest livestreams, though I know content creators crave those sweet sweet attention-whore bux.

@FujiWuji exactly, you nailed it fam.
 
In their minds they are right and those evil corrupt lawyers are the only obstacle between them and their sweet victory.
If only there wasn't the law of the land in the way, I would totally win my lawsuit - Melinda

So have their brothers, the Lithuanians (who got cucked and did not get any land post ww2)
Lithuania was not very big in the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth. That why they didn't get much land post WW1 either.
I like watching this guy for interesting tidbits of history since he isn't really too biased with history and covers interesting topics

 
Lithuania was not very big in the Polish Lithuanian commonwealth.
I wasn't speaking about Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
So I'm a little bit tired and this is a lot of crazy reading, but why is she re-litigating the settled issues rather than discussion the application for costs?
She's retarded. Also, I think these past few filings were less "relitigation" and more "Hardin is a meannie poopy head, please tell meanie to no do mean, Court, please!"
 
So I'm a little bit tired and this is a lot of crazy reading, but why is she re-litigating the settled issues rather than discussion the application for costs?
Best guess is that she is convinced that the court is going to agree that the attorney fee shouldn't be paid because Moon's website is big meanie to her despite 6+ years showing her that the court doesn't agree with her on anything she says
 
The third picture in the results, at least for me, jumped out like a cheap haunted-house scare. It's the dynamic duo together -- the one with the redlines on Marshy's hat. Melly is leaning in to Marshy and grabbing him around the waist for dear life, as though she were dressed up for Halloween as the embodiment of the Overly Attached Girlfriend meme. (I mean, except that she isn't looking at him even a little bit. She's eyefucking herself in the camera lens.) Meanwhile, Marshy's posture is ramrod straight, and his "smile" can only be described as a strained rictus. He's not looking at her either -- couple goals? He's looking for the nearest exit; his meth pipe; and/or one word out of her mouth so he can
Screen Shot 2019-03-13 at 3.37.41 PM.png
You're right, he does look incredibly uncomfortable.


Screen Shot 2019-03-13 at 3.39.15 PM.png
I think he's camera shy primarily. Shout-out to Melinda for having the same dead eyes and viciously overplucked eyebrows in every picture, though!
 
She's exceptional. Also, I think these past few filings were less "relitigation" and more "Hardin is a meannie poopy head, please tell meanie to no do mean, Court, please!"
Yeah, but if I recall correctly, that was her original "argument" too. Maybe version 1.0 had less "Hardin is a meanie" and more "Null is a meanie."
 
Yeah, but if I recall correctly, that was her original "argument" too. Maybe version 1.0 had less "Hardin is a meanie" and more "Null is a meanie."
Her original argument was more or less "thread exist. Much bad. Kiwi say mean thing. Make many angry me. Phone exist. Kiwi do call phone. Null help phone. Big mean! Give money! Null also do much constitutional violate!"

99% of her original arguments have been litigated in the past, so I guess you are correct.
 
Her original argument was more or less "thread exist. Much bad. Kiwi say mean thing. Make many angry me. Phone exist. Kiwi do call phone. Null help phone. Big mean! Give money! Null also do much constitutional violate!"

99% of her original arguments have been litigated in the past, so I guess you are correct.
I don't think any of the 5 prior courts could figure out what her original arguments were either. Because she is a lunatic.
 
Your American judges need to take a leaf from some of our Canadian jurors and be a little more blunt. May I suggest the following line from Meads v. Meads (2012 ABQB 571)?

"The bluntly idiotic substance of Mr. Mead’s argument explains the unnecessarily complicated manner in which it was presented."
 
I thought they were dismissed because she failed to state a claim aka they couldn't understand anything she was saying
Failure to state a claim does not mean that the court does not understand your argument. It means that your argument has no basis under the law, and thus court is unable to provide remedy. That being said, sometimes the court can not understand your argument. Like Judge Jones put it in one of Mel's suits (quoting another decision):

Screenshot_20211019-085957_Drive.jpg
 
Back