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

[Useful_Mistake]

SURPRISE GUEST?

 

[RodgerDodger]

Thing is, if they find anti-SLAPP a procedural rule (which a majority of federal courts have found under the Erie doctrine in diversity cases) rather than a substantive law (since all states have some equivalent of 12(b)(6) or 56), then it wouldn't apply at all.

And even Randazza conceded that Monty would be entitled to discovery, at least if he showed some justification for it (a very low bar). I'm not sure what Nick wins even if Nick wins (which seems highly possible at this point). One of the most important parts of anti-SLAPP is not having to go through discovery.

But by the same token, I'm not sure what discovery could bring out regarding drunken idiot slapfights on the internet that wasn't already performed on camera? It's just another way to burn more money.

 

[mindlessobserver]

and Rekieta made the defamatory remarks in Minnasota.

Jurisdiction arguments are nightmarishly complex, but they all generally boil down to "where did the Injury(civil) or Crime(criminal) occur?" In the case of Defamation, this is usually where the defamed person lives.

That said, it is a good idea to remember the Johnny Depp defamation trial. he managed to get that case heard in Virginia state court because Amber Heard's OpEd was published in the Washington Post that had distribution in Fairfax County where the server the OpEd was saved on was also located. So Depp argued his reputation was specifically injured IN Fairfax County (with secondary damage globally). The Virginia Courts bought the argument and the trial happened there despite the fact neither Depp, Heard OR the Washington Post are actually located in Virginia.

Of course, the reason why Depp wanted the case heard in Virginia, is because like Minnesota, Virginia does not have a SLAPP provision. Its more an informal construct of the court and there is no fee shifting involved. Its just a way to expeditiously get rid of a defamation case that is clearly frivolous. So that blatantly was forum shopping, but Depp had a good argument for it since the Washington Post still sends out printed copies of its rag, and people still buy it.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Interesting argument:

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Josh is officially invited in the coming days to discuss this, his upcoming lawsuit, and the Greer stuff! Nice! Says to call him up on Signal if he wants in now

 

[Useful_Mistake]

NULL LIVE ON POTENTIALLY CRIMINAL NOW!

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Paraphrasing Null's words:
"So, if Nick wins, this goes back to Minnesota district court to apply Colorado law? That's insane. That's what [Montagraph's] defense should be. That's insane."

 

[AnOminous]

One of the judges did point out that usually (federally) you sue in your backyard, or using your backyard's laws.

There isn't really a jurisdictional question but the presumption that it's forum shopping (considering that is one of the factors) to sue in the defendant's state when it's highly questionable that you could even establish jurisdiction in your own (where is the purposeful availment etc. when not only did Nick not know he was in Colorado but Monty even lied about that) seems wrong.

That factor should not even be considered because if Monty had only one state to sue in, how could he be forum shopping?

This basically means if you have two Internet celebrities beefing, as Randazza put it, the one with the most lenient libel laws automatically wins if they both sue each other for libel.

 

[mindlessobserver]

Paraphrasing Null's words:
"So, if Nick wins, this goes back to Minnesota district court to apply Colorado law? That's insane. That's what [Montagraph's] defense should be. That's insane."

Judge responds "Sir, this is a court of law. If you want things to make sense, we are all going to the bar across the street at 5 PM. Don't be late".

 

[Useful_Mistake]

That factor should not even be considered because if Monty had only one state to sue in, how could he be forum shopping?

That's pretty much the argument Monty made in a superchat to Potential Criminal. His lawyer should have mentioned that too, but I don't recall him doing so weirdly

 

[talk talk talk]

I haven't listened to Null for a long time. He's gotten a lot better at speaking in interviews.

 

[IDF]

"God DAMN it!"

I thought he was gonna snap at Mrs. Criminal so I held back my snarky two dollar super, lol.
Sean's human but seems like a genuinely good dude. Him and Robert Gouveia seem to be the best lawtube has to offer and oddly enough I found both these guys through rackets.

 

[AnOminous]

But by the same token, I'm not sure what discovery could bring out regarding drunken idiot slapfights on the internet that wasn't already performed on camera? It's just another way to burn more money.

I think it would be reasonable to depose him to ask exactly what his basis for his statement was, because according to the actual malice standard, a subjective doubt of the truthfulness of his claims is needed. So considering Monty would have to prove that if the case went to trial, anything that would go to his state of mind should be subject to discovery.

If it's relevant to any point at issue (or could even LEAD to admissable evidence), it's discoverable.

That's pretty much the argument Monty made in a superchat to Potential Criminal. His lawyer should have mentioned that too, but I don't recall him doing so weirdly

That was one of my serious gripes with what his lawyer failed to do.

 

[Musashi's Son]

Loved how Josh explained what he would do to Vito if Joe Biden convicted him.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Poll finished

 

[mindlessobserver]

Loved how Josh explained what he would do to Vito if Joe Biden convicted him.

No no stalker, Josh said what the STATE would do. He was just saying he would happily act as a lawful agent of the State! Implying he meant to illegally kill Vito is defamation Child. Enjoy prison.

 

[Musashi's Son]

No no stalker, Josh said what the STATE would do. He was just saying he would happily act as a lawful agent of the State! Implying he meant to illegally kill Vito is defamation Child. Enjoy prison.

No stalker your own argument is false because your name is mindlessobserver which means you don't have a mind child. Enjoy prison.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

RALPHA MALE IS ON!

 

[Musashi's Son]

RALPHA MALE IS ON!

He is gonna start HOLLERING to Sean.

 

[Low IQ Doctor]

Ralph looks just as healthy as my father did before he died of a heart attack at 55.