- Joined
- Jan 4, 2021
Maybe he expected a boomer coomer to be an easy target, but he's still a lawyer. He'll find the best lawyer possible and mop the floor with him and make some content out of it so he can get more super chats.
Steve Quest (p/k/a Montagraph) vs. Nicholas Robert Rekieta & Rekieta Law, LLC (2023)
- Thread starter Useful_Mistake
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2016
Bro, trust me bro, he said some real bad stuff bro. On or about the dates of a while back he totally made me real sad and I’m straight up not having a good time, bro.
That’s a hell of a complaint. I’d assume Montagraph wrote it himself but they misspelled “Negligent” in the third claim so I’m sure he had a lawyer prepare this.
But where are the specific facts? What specific Minnesota laws have been broken? Why is this court the right venue for this claim rather than federal (since the parties are in different jurisdictions)? What specific damages has he suffered?
I’ve been spoiled by the other suits in this sub that have a lot more details in their pleadings. On the up side it’s better for Rekieta to defend against this trash heap than something competently written.
That’s a hell of a complaint. I’d assume Montagraph wrote it himself but they misspelled “Negligent” in the third claim so I’m sure he had a lawyer prepare this.
But where are the specific facts? What specific Minnesota laws have been broken? Why is this court the right venue for this claim rather than federal (since the parties are in different jurisdictions)? What specific damages has he suffered?
I’ve been spoiled by the other suits in this sub that have a lot more details in their pleadings. On the up side it’s better for Rekieta to defend against this trash heap than something competently written.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2019
Is that the famous Nick Rekieta the Ball-do spokesman?
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
Can someone explain this to me?well this just got interesting
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2019
What are the odds we get the balldo mentioned in a court document 
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2019
Apparently, the judge is the same judge the presided over one of the last cases Nick represented a client. The case was covered in Nick's thread (see @I'm not a Robot's posts) and if what @Kosher Salt posted is accurate, the in-person interaction between Rekieta and Judge Fischer was interesting.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2019
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2022
Talk about when it rains it pours. If ever there was a time when a frivolous lawsuit against Rekieta would cause maximum life disruption it would be now. Maybe Rekieta will be lucky enough to use the dislike for Steve as a way to galvanize his audience. This feels like it was a monkey paw wish by Nick. "I wish for something to distract from the Locals drama."
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2019
Boy I wish Nick hadn’t spent the last month and a half in a complete tailspin, otherwise I’d enjoy this a lot more.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
That means nothing. It's water under the bridge.
It's definitely another good reason for Nick not to self-represent, if it's possible the judge actually personally dislikes him.
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
So any opinion on this? It looks like gamesmanship in the extreme to file a motion for default literally the day after actually filing the complaint. How was he supposed to file a response?
Is this likely to piss off the judge or is this kind of behavior encouraged in Minnesota?
Is this likely to piss off the judge or is this kind of behavior encouraged in Minnesota?
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
The latter, I guess. This is pretty much the given reasoning:
Seems stupid to me, but what do I know, Minnesota is weird
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2015
It will just piss off the judge. With Minnesota's pocket service practice, extensions to answer or otherwise plead are routinely granted by the other side. No judge is going to look favorably on this motion.
Apologies for the double-post.
Here's a free one for Rackets and Randazza. Since Randazza is out of state and Rackets has almost no Minnesota civil experience, they are likely to miss it.
The summons states that Rackets has 20 days to answer the complaint. That used to be the rule, but the rule was amended to 21 days a couple years ago.
The summons must state the proper deadline for the defendant to answer or otherwise defend against the complaint:
This means Rackets has the defense of insufficient process (not insufficient service of process, which is when the process server fucks up) from the fucked up form Monty's dumb old lawyer used.
A surprisingly large number of MN lawyers STILL use their old summons form. Usually nobody cares, but if you are going to be a dick about pushing a default judgment, Judge Fischer now has a hook to hang her hat on to deny the default motion.
This one's free, Rackets. Next one you pay for.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
Unfortunately, Rekieta DEFINITELY doesn't visit this site anymore, so he will never see it.
- Joined
- May 16, 2019
That article linked earlier provides some of the background on Minnesota servicing quirks.
A distinctive feature of Minnesota civil procedure is the mode of commencing an action. In the vast majority of U.S. states, a civil action is commenced by filing documents with a court. This is not the case in Minnesota. Per a largely foregone legal tradition dating back to the early days of U.S. civil procedure, a party in Minnesota commences an action by serving a summons upon the defendant(s) 2 No filing need be made. This practice is affectionately termed "hip-pocket service," and it comes with its share of benefits and drawbacks.
...In Minnesota, a civil action is commenced in one of three ways: (a) by serving a summons directly upon the defendant, (b) by serving a summons through the mail and receiving an acknowledgement from the defendant, or (c) by delivering a summons to the sheriff in the county where each defendant resides (provided that the sheriff then serves the summons within sixty days).
Remarkably, none of these alternatives involves actually filing suit with the court. That is to say, a lawsuit becomes real without regard to whether the State has any notice of its existence. The applicable statute of limitations is tolled, and the defendant must 20 serve an answer within twenty days. This is anomalous. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that an action is commenced by, and only by, filing a complaint with the court. Only then may the plaintiff serve process. The summons will bear the court's seal and be signed by a court clerk.
...In three states and three states only-Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota-it is possible to commence an action, conduct lengthy discovery, and reach a settlement without ever filing. The parties thus circumvent court filing fees altogether and consume precisely zero judicial resources.
The act of serving a summons and complaint without filing is referred to as "hip-pocket service" or "pocket service. ', District Court Judge Joan N. Ericksen explains the term: "This is colloquially referred to as 'pocket service' because a plaintiff may serve one or more defendants and keep the complaint 'in his pocket' rather than making a public filing.""
...In Minnesota, a civil action is commenced in one of three ways: (a) by serving a summons directly upon the defendant, (b) by serving a summons through the mail and receiving an acknowledgement from the defendant, or (c) by delivering a summons to the sheriff in the county where each defendant resides (provided that the sheriff then serves the summons within sixty days).
Remarkably, none of these alternatives involves actually filing suit with the court. That is to say, a lawsuit becomes real without regard to whether the State has any notice of its existence. The applicable statute of limitations is tolled, and the defendant must 20 serve an answer within twenty days. This is anomalous. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that an action is commenced by, and only by, filing a complaint with the court. Only then may the plaintiff serve process. The summons will bear the court's seal and be signed by a court clerk.
...In three states and three states only-Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota-it is possible to commence an action, conduct lengthy discovery, and reach a settlement without ever filing. The parties thus circumvent court filing fees altogether and consume precisely zero judicial resources.
The act of serving a summons and complaint without filing is referred to as "hip-pocket service" or "pocket service. ', District Court Judge Joan N. Ericksen explains the term: "This is colloquially referred to as 'pocket service' because a plaintiff may serve one or more defendants and keep the complaint 'in his pocket' rather than making a public filing.""
There's a footnote to that underlined part:
Has Rekieta filed a Rule 12 motion?
Combined with what @talk talk talk posted above, it sounds like there's a few ways MN accommodates their own quirky system to avoid defaults. But it's going to require some actual lawyering on Nick's part.
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
As far as I have seen, Nick didn't file anything
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2015
Nothing shows up as filed yet. It can take a few hours for filings to show up in MCRO, though.
More importantly, nothing served through MNCIS and still no counsel attached to Rackets. Those show up immediately and I didn't see anything a few minutes ago. He didn't even attach himself as pro se.
None of this is fatal and the lolsuit is still a lolsuit, but it shows Rackets just fucking shit up. The complaint is short and could have been answered with a general denial to buy a little time to hire somebody to represent him. Now he has to pay extra to have Randazza or an associate rush to get admitted pro hac vice and fight off the dumb default motion. Yes, he will win that motion, but he's going to have to pay someone a couple grand because he was too busy flirting with wine moms to even send a general denial answer.
Can he afford a couple grand? Probably. But a couple grand here and a couple grand there and pretty soon you have no grands left.
More importantly, nothing served through MNCIS and still no counsel attached to Rackets. Those show up immediately and I didn't see anything a few minutes ago. He didn't even attach himself as pro se.
None of this is fatal and the lolsuit is still a lolsuit, but it shows Rackets just fucking shit up. The complaint is short and could have been answered with a general denial to buy a little time to hire somebody to represent him. Now he has to pay extra to have Randazza or an associate rush to get admitted pro hac vice and fight off the dumb default motion. Yes, he will win that motion, but he's going to have to pay someone a couple grand because he was too busy flirting with wine moms to even send a general denial answer.
Can he afford a couple grand? Probably. But a couple grand here and a couple grand there and pretty soon you have no grands left.
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2019
Surely Nick is happy. Content for weeks. Also lol, as I said when he took a PPP loan when he's a rich lawyer, Nick is at heart a grifter. I don't think the paypiggies will learn tho.
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2017
How on earth could Nick file a timely response if the case want even docketed until literally 48 hours ago? I cannot believe Minnesota, however weird it is, actually allows for those sorts of shenanigans