Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)

[The Great Citracett]

This "new" mediation is just one email, so it's not really the same as a court-ordered mediation.

Ackchyually, it's mediTation, so really he's just seeking enlightenment. Maybe some inner peace.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Ackchyually, it's mediTation, so really he's just seeking enlightenment.

This shows the true horror of Mr. Josh Moon. He alone bars people from enlightenment.

 

[Accept Only Substitutes]

Those exhibits are even worse than I thought they would be. I can feel my head tightening as we speak.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Those exhibits are even worse than I thought they would be. I can feel my head tightening as we speak.

You need to expand your mind. A Federal Circuit Appeals court, on oral arguments and en banc petition determined that this was something that required the full attention of the Third Branch of the United States Federal Government, its Honorable Court.

The issue is you are not thinking sufficiently hard. I suggest you think harder and consider the merits of this case, as those merits are now citation worthy and are now guiding law within the 10th circuit of the United States Judiciary.

 

[Harvey Danger]

This shows the true horror of Mr. Josh Moon. He alone bars people from enlightenment.

It's true. Joshua Moon personally barred me from escaping samsara and feeds endless shoka into my spirit. Kiwi Farms, a website, is the primary source of raga and moha in my life.

Speaking of moha:





I've read this five times now and it just keeps being the most delusional complaint I've ever seen.

Pro tip, Russ: if you want the suit to end THEN DROP THE SUIT. You are the retarded asshole who keeps it "lingering". As is frequently the case, the only person stopping you is you.

 

[Moths]

My head hurts. This case should be a citation against the use of pro-se litigants.

 

[ScooterL]

Pro tip, Russ: if you want the suit to end THEN DROP THE SUIT.

Lawfags: if Russell drops it now, is he suddenly liable for a lot of costs?

I know you can't get blood from a stone, but theoretically.

 

[mindlessobserver]

My head hurts. This case should be a citation against the use of pro-se litigants.

Which is a shame, because Pro Se litigation is something very unique to American jurisprudence, in that any dumb ass is allowed to bring forth suit for redress of grievance, or defend themselves on their own ability. There is something very wholesome behind the idea, and as a principle its something that absolutely should exist in every country. You shouldn't have to give a bazillion dollars to some ass hole with a technocratic credential to defend you or represent your interests. You should be able to defend your self, or advance your own legal interests if you want.

Sadly the system as its set up is schizophrenic. It embraces the revolutionary ideal behind Pro Se litigation, while simultaneously layers on the the massive amount of technocratic and expensive bullshit.

I would argue that instead of Pro-Se litigation being done away with "entirely", there should be some limitations put on it. For example, it should be easier to declare a Pro-Se PLAINTIFF to be vexatious. There is a huge difference between being Pro-Se as the Defendant and being Pro-Se as the Plaintiff. A Defendant Pro-Se is usually poor as fuck and cant afford competent defense. A pro-se Plaintiff is almost always an abuser of process. They never win, but winning is not the goal for them. The process is the goal.

A Pro-Se plaintiff should also be held to the exact same standard as a regular represented plaintiff. No more of the "reading the filings in the facts most favorable". I get why that is useful for a Pro-Se Defendant, but in the case of the Plaintiff, the initiating party, that needs to go.

 

[Jotch]

>One of Moon's users
JOSH...
WHY DO YOU OWN US...
IT IS ON PUBLIC RECORD THAT YOU POSSESS US...
PLEASE LET US EXERT FREE WILL ONCE AGAIN JOSH...

 

[Iron Hamster]

So without semi competent legal council classic Russ is back. I'm not a lawyer but "Sorry your honor I was to busy reading emails and reporting them to actually read your rulings. I'll get to it when I can but in the meantime make these dang dirty kiwi farmers stop emailing me!" isn't going to hold up in court.
Edit to add: if the person emailing Russ actually is a farmer, knock that shit off. That makes you as retarded as Russ.

Seems like the logical step at the moment is to see how many social media stalking posts he was still able to make in this time span. Surely all these emails prevented that too right?

 

[Debbie Macomber]

5. So it is quite unusual, and borderline frivolous, that Defendants are filing paper after paper

Good ole Russell, always using words that describe his behaviour to attack others because they worked on him, never grasping why they can't just be flipped around like a chess move

 

[DSP's Tax Lawyer]

Russell wants the state to enforce his desire for me to not talk about him online. That's an infringement on my first amendment right. I will sue Russell Greer for Acerthorn levels of money for his desire to infringe on my first amendment rights

 

[Harambe]

Which is a shame, because Pro Se litigation is something very unique to American jurisprudence, in that any dumb ass is allowed to bring forth suit for redress of grievance, or defend themselves on their own ability. There is something very wholesome behind the idea, and as a principle its something that absolutely should exist in every country. You shouldn't have to give a bazillion dollars to some ass hole with a technocratic credential to defend you or represent your interests. You should be able to defend your self, or advance your own legal interests if you want.

Sadly the system as its set up is schizophrenic. It embraces the revolutionary ideal behind Pro Se litigation, while simultaneously layers on the the massive amount of technocratic and expensive bullshit.

I would argue that instead of Pro-Se litigation being done away with "entirely", there should be some limitations put on it. For example, it should be easier to declare a Pro-Se PLAINTIFF to be vexatious. There is a huge difference between being Pro-Se as the Defendant and being Pro-Se as the Plaintiff. A Defendant Pro-Se is usually poor as fuck and cant afford competent defense. A pro-se Plaintiff is almost always an abuser of process. They never win, but winning is not the goal for them. The process is the goal.

A Pro-Se plaintiff should also be held to the exact same standard as a regular represented plaintiff. No more of the "reading the filings in the facts most favorable". I get why that is useful for a Pro-Se Defendant, but in the case of the Plaintiff, the initiating party, that needs to go.

How much abuse is there of pro se by vexatious plaintiffs? America has hundreds of millions of retards, but Russell seems to be a rare exception. Don’t the retards usually get caught up in small claims court and family court and divorce court and drug court, not in endless civil litigation? How many people like Russ have there been?

 

[YellowIsACoolColor]

>One of Moon's users
JOSH...
WHY DO YOU OWN US...
IT IS ON PUBLIC RECORD THAT YOU POSSESS US...
PLEASE LET US EXERT FREE WILL ONCE AGAIN JOSH...

No you see we're actually the users OF Josh. We have full controll over him.

 

[Himedall All-seeing Waifu]

How many times are judges going to pikachuface when fuckface makes a mockery of their court, like he does with literally everything, for the billionth time?

Do judges really have to give the benefit of the doubt every. Single. Time. For the “too retarded to follow basic instructions” for every event in court?

A shrewd judge wouldn’t see this as “oh I underestimated how naive he is, I should let him have months to fuck around and waste all of our time” but rather “this bitch is spitting in the face of the court and has never had consequences”

I am fairly certain there is a rule where judges are required to assume the best about pro se litigants.

Seems like the logical step at the moment is to see how many social media stalking posts he was still able to make in this time span. Surely all these emails prevented that too right?

I will laugh if Hardin cites this in his response.

 

[SCRAM]

I'm legit excited for the response.

 

[FatMan]

I'm legit excited for the response.

I foresee an upcoming "motion to strike the entire set of responses for being a rambling incoherent mess of irrelevant commentary and plights".

ETA - I know you were referring to Hardin's response to Russ, but I personally can't wait for the slew of garbage we're gonna get when Russ finally gets around to his filings.

 

[mindlessobserver]

How much abuse is there of pro se by vexatious plaintiffs? America has hundreds of millions of retards, but Russell seems to be a rare exception. Don’t the retards usually get caught up in small claims court and family court and divorce court and drug court, not in endless civil litigation? How many people like Russ have there been?

Alot. People have won thousands of dollars in settlements from major corporations simply because it's cheaper for the company to give some retard 10,000 dollars then it is to actually fight them on the merits of their case.

Even bothering to answer the complaint can be more expensive then paying them to go away. There is an entire industry of risk management in corporate America designed specifically around mitigating any risk of lawsuit from random retards.

 

[DSP's Tax Lawyer]

Alot. People have won thousands of dollars in settlements from major corporations simply because it's cheaper for the company to give some retard 10,000 dollars then it is to actually fight them on the merits of their case.

Even bothering to answer the complaint can be more expensive then paying them to go away. There is an entire industry of risk management in corporate America designed specifically around mitigating any risk of lawsuit from random retards.

Its a fucked up system. Pro Se plantiffs should have to go through magistrate judges to determine if these lolsuits are worthy of even being responded to by anyone else. Its just ripe for abuse

 

[Harm]

View attachment 5689328

Russell wants the state to enforce his desire for me to not talk about him online. That's an infringement on my first amendment right. I will sue Russell Greer for Acerthorn levels of money for his desire to infringe on my first amendment rights

He admits the emails he receives are anonymized yet wants us to believe he can identify them specifically as users of this website.

This man is exceptionally unintelligent.