Steve Quest (p/k/a Montagraph) vs. Nicholas Robert Rekieta & Rekieta Law, LLC (2023)

[Balldo's Gate]

Fair. I do not give Nose a pass on this. I am sure that what was true in Schneider's half pants story was that Nick tries to work things out outside the normal process and hates to follow rules and regulations.

Nick's hypocrisy is not really all that shocking to me either. We are all hypocrites to some degree, but Nick had just made the dissonance between his stated values and his actions massively apparent. He has Streisanded himself, and that is what is so entertaining about it.

Ultimately there was a reason Schneider avoided having any contact at all with Rekieta, to the point of admitting to the court "yeah, I ignored his communications". Ultimately what Schneider said about Nick is distorted through being relayed through Spectre or even worse through Spectre and then through Nick, but I don't think the latter's narrative that Schneider was simply mad that Nick had turned up in shorts is accurate.

My guess is he was more mad that he turned up in shorts, ostensibly to drop something off, but then tried to chat informally about the case. That's what Spectre's Discord messages at the time (see bottom image) seem to indicate. And I suspect he ignored Rekieta now because he guessed that Rekieta would try to pull the same thing - turn up at the office to ask for an extension, then say "Hey, why are you representing this creepy weirdo anyway?" and potentially place him in an ethical quandary. He viewed the safer option as to ignore all communications from Nick.

The first problem with that strategy, if it really was Nick's strategy, is that this is a literal defamation case. It is expected that Rekieta has strongly negative opinions of Monty.

Nick also doesn't seem to have enough goodwill in his local legal community where him dropping a bad word about someone is enough to get a lawyer to drop someone as a client. He has managed to have negative run-ins with both Monty's lawyer and with the judge, who Nick claims to have told off for not realizing he was working pro bono on one of his last cases, I guess in an elevator after sentencing or something.

 

[Kosher Salt]

The classy thing would be to take someone's money and then not actually represent them?

I mean, it would be the ethical thing to do, after he learned that Monty was using him to perpetrate false statements to the court, to file a motion correcting the record and informing the court of what is true, and, if the truth is fatal to the lawsuit, to try to withdraw from representing him (which is what it sounded like Nick was suggesting in that clip).

Does this douche even know what a lawyer IS?

Exactly. So yeah, obviously we know that he would never do that.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

I mean, it would be the ethical thing to do, after he learned that Monty was using him to perpetrate false statements to the court, to file a motion correcting the record and informing the court of what is true, and, if the truth is fatal to the lawsuit, to try to withdraw from representing him (which is what it sounded like Nick was suggesting in that clip).

It seems like the truth isn't fatal to the lawsuit, and that in actual fact Monty living in Illinois and not Colorado would be very beneficial for his lawsuit.

Why did Monty do it? Maybe he was afraid that Rekieta would blast out his address on Locals, which is what he threatened to do back in October to the people who submitted ethics complaints against him. The same Locals community where there's currently (and has been for a while) an unhinged poster regularly posting specific threats of violence. Nick has joked about how Still-Life is risking arrest over the insane threats he's posting, but neglected to ban him, even though he's banned more than one person now for the high crime of mocking Rekieta in his hugbox. The threat of reprisal against the ethics complainants earned him a new ethics investigation that, last I heard is still open, many months after the incident.

Nick has spent a long time now getting trashed on stream and acting like a maximally obnoxious asshole and is confused why people are treating him in kind.

 

[Kosher Salt]

It seems like the truth isn't fatal to the lawsuit, and that in actual fact Monty living in Illinois and not Colorado would be very beneficial for his lawsuit.

That's not the only thing he's misrepresented though. I'll give Schneider the benefit of the doubt (though at this point he probably doesn't deserve it) and assume he hasn't watched Nick's entire livestreams. He might have missed the part where Nick specifically said he's joking. So he might not have known it was false when he wrote in the complaint that Nick never even said he was joking.

If Monty's entire case is frivolous bullshit, an ethical lawyer wouldn't have helped him file it. But I guess we'll have to wait and see whether the case is frivolous bullshit or whether it's allowed to proceed.

Why did Monty do it? Maybe he was afraid that Rekieta would blast out his address on Locals, which is what he threatened to do back in October to the people who submitted ethics complaints against him.

Monty's not exactly innocent of this either.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

That's not the only thing he's misrepresented though. I'll give Schneider the benefit of the doubt (though at this point he probably doesn't deserve it) and assume he hasn't watched Nick's entire livestreams. He might have missed the part where Nick specifically said he's joking. So he might not have known it was false when he wrote in the complaint that Nick never even said he was joking.

To be fair, in Nick's most outrageous statement, he did not state he was joking.



IIRC, Randazza's defense in his motion to dismiss was that Rekieta was drinking heavily that night.

Monty's not exactly innocent of this either.

Well, Monty is a cow and Rekieta is now right down there on his level. It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that either party would whine about things they've themselves done to other people.

 

[AnOminous]

Its not something any sane attorney would fool around with.

So something Nick is likely to do is what you're saying.

It seems like the truth isn't fatal to the lawsuit, and that in actual fact Monty living in Illinois and not Colorado would be very beneficial for his lawsuit.

I honestly don't think he could have been aware in advance that Randazza was going to file a motion making a highly esoteric argument about his state of domicile. So he may have made a misrepresentation of fact, but the intent to defraud wouldn't have been there if he didn't think he was getting some advantage (in the case) from doing it.

And if the choice-of-law argument isn't meritorious, then it isn't even a material misrepresentation of fact.

 

[Kosher Salt]

To be fair, in Nick's most outrageous statement, he did not state he was joking.

Was this the very same video when he also said that "the kid stuff" was "a joke", or was that a different video? Either way, he clarified his accusation.

The complaint also says "Defendant Nicholas Rekieta never couches his criticism of Plaintiff using terms suggesting he is merely offering his opinion", which is also demonstrably false.

 

[Balldo's Gate]

Was this the very same video when he also said that "the kid stuff" was "a joke", or was that a different video? Either way, he clarified his accusation.

No. The daring to sue was from October 13 and the comments about the "kid stuff" being a "joke"/"satire" were made a couple weeks later on a video from October 23rd.

On October 6 he made a comment that he had made a "dry joke" about Monty, but that was apparently a joke about Monty fisting himself, and not anything involving children.

That's according to Randazza's motion, anyway. Haven't watched the videos.

The complaint also says "Defendant Nicholas Rekieta never couches his criticism of Plaintiff using terms suggesting he is merely offering his opinion", which is also demonstrably false.

This is why you have discovery though!

It is not reasonable to insist that an attorney has to watch hundreds of hours of footage before filing a lawsuit just in case the defendant tried to retroactively insert context into a statement he had made weeks earlier.

 

[Kosher Salt]

It is not reasonable to insist that an attorney has to watch hundreds of hours of footage before filing a lawsuit just in case the defendant tried to retroactively insert context into a statement he had made weeks earlier.

I mean, it's also not reasonable to use extreme language like "never" when you haven't watched the hundreds of hours of video footage that would be necessary to state that with certainty.

 

[AnOminous]

IIRC, Randazza's defense in his motion to dismiss was that Rekieta was drinking heavily that night.

That's not ordinarily a defense, but in a defamation case it does raise a question of fact as to how seriously the audience would take an obviously intoxicated person ranting and saying crazy shit. The problem with factual questions like this is they go to a jury.

Whether or not Monty has the money to go there, it will still cost Nick plenty more than it already has unless the next action is dismissing it. We also don't know if this is a flat fee case, or if Schneider is even doing it at least partly out of a personal grudge. He doesn't seem to like Nick much, although maybe that's more due to how Nick has seethed at him over this particular case.

Even if he somehow got fee shifting, I don't think the lodestar analysis on this case would justify a full award of fees for hiring an inordinately skilled lawyer for the job.

 

[Dammit Mandrake!]

I enjoy watching Nick call the lawyer for Steve a loser and making rape jokes.

 

[Dyn]

Randazza's defense in his motion to dismiss was that Rekieta was drinking heavily that night.

Should have gone with "He was really mad that day."

 

[AnOminous]

Should have gone with "He was really mad that day."

He was mad that his penis doesn't work any more and he has to put his balls in a weird little cuck cage to sodomize his wife with them.

 

[prolapsed_cranium]

He was mad that his penis doesn't work any more and he has to put his balls in a weird little cuck cage to sodomize his wife with them.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury.... we've all been there.....

 

[SaidNoOneEver]

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury.... we've all been there.....

If the Balldo fit, you must acquit!

 

[Dixieland Buckaroo]

I thought maybe Nick was in Obsessivo Depressio mode because something happened in his case, but a whole lot of nothing:

Looks like nothing but a scheduling conference on the horizon (July 18 ).

 

[Balldo's Gate]

I thought maybe Nick was in Obsessivo Depressio mode because something happened in his case, but a whole lot of nothing:
View attachment 5144244
Looks like nothing but a scheduling conference on the horizon (July 18 ).

One thing to expect before July 18 is the judge's ruling on Rekieta's motion to dismiss first. The hearing on that motion was held on April 10th and it is my understanding is that statutorily, the judge has a maximum of 90 days to issue a ruling. Thus, we could be waiting until July to hear back on that.

We are about 7 weeks out from the hearing and Nick is getting antsy. He appears to earnestly believe that this is a totally frivolous case and may be puzzled why it hasn't been dismissed yet.

In addition, during that hearing Monty's lawyer, Schneider, made some characterizations of something Nick said in on a livestream in the weeks leading up to that hearing that Rekieta took issue with. Rekieta's lawyer filed a letter to the court complaining about that in late April, but so far there's nothing in the record indicating the judge has actioned that at all.

I noticed that at the start of a clip uploaded by Elissa, Rekieta said he loves Randazza - but in the same way he's been saying "I love Josh". According to a visibly sloshed and shirtless Nick Rekieta, Randazza - a famous 1A attorney with tons of experience in Internet issues - doesn't "understand social media" because he told him to stop talking about his open lawsuit.

I would argue that his decision to offer that advice suggests he does, in fact, understand social media.

 

[Swole McPole]

In addition, during that hearing Monty's lawyer, Schneider, made some characterizations of something Nick said in on a livestream in the weeks leading up to that hearing that Rekieta took issue with. Rekieta's lawyer filed a letter to the court complaining about that in late April, but so far there's nothing in the record indicating the judge has actioned that at all.

"I'm spending the big bucks to get Randazza, and what's it getting me? Nothing at all, that I can see. Monty's case just seems to be proceeding as planned. Judge has named the date for a Scheduling Hearing, and that may well mean this damn thing -- that's cost me in excess of $75k so far -- could very well go on to the next stage. What's that going to cost me? Another $75? When Randazza filed that complaint, I expected the judge to call in Schneider and give him a good fucking spanking, but what's happened? Nothing at all that I can see. What the hell am I getting for this unearthly amount of money that I'm spending? If this goes to the next level and doesn't get dismissed, I'm going to have to settle. I might even have to apologize. I'm going to look like an utter retard and all those bastards on Kiwifarms will laugh at me yet again."

"Kayla! Bring me the shotgun!"

Monty might be a lolcow and Schneider might be an enormous douche, but it'd be really gratifying to see a barely competent small town practitioner kick Randazza's ass.

 

[AnOminous]

Monty might be a lolcow and Schneider might be an enormous douche, but it'd be really gratifying to see a barely competent small town practitioner kick Randazza's ass.

Think about Fred Gwynne's (RIP) judge in My Cousin Vinny. That's a pretty accurate portrayal of how small town judges think of city slicker lawyers.

 

[prolapsed_cranium]

...but it'd be really gratifying to see a barely competent small town practitioner kick Randazza's ass.

It won't be due to anything more than Nick supplying good facts.