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

  • 🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.

When will the Judge issue a ruling regarding the Motion to Dismiss?

  • This Month

    Votes: 67 14.5%
  • Next Month

    Votes: 56 12.1%
  • This Year

    Votes: 73 15.8%
  • Next Year

    Votes: 155 33.5%
  • Whenever he issues an update to the sanctions

    Votes: 112 24.2%

  • Total voters
    463
I'm gonna have to say the Supreme Court taking this case would be against Null's best interests

The case was already about to get dismissed in Utah for Russell's sheer incompetence, and as Null said, if the Supreme Court picked this up, Russ would have top lawyers from all over the country offering to represent him. The case was only brought back from the dead because Russell's lolyers, laughable as they are, actually knew a lick of law and how to apply it correctly!
 
Mfw utah judge dismisses the case due to failure to prosecute before it goes to Supreme Court

View attachment 5773871
That's obviously the most boring likely outcome because a dismissal would essentially moot the case, at least unless the "capable of repetition yet evading review" exception applies.
The case was already about to get dismissed in Utah for Russell's sheer incompetence, and as Null said, if the Supreme Court picked this up, Russ would have top lawyers from all over the country offering to represent him.
So would we though.

Also it's not like Null ever promised us anything but a glorious death.
 
I'm gonna have to say the Supreme Court taking this case would be against Null's best interests

The case was already about to get dismissed in Utah for Russell's sheer incompetence, and as Null said, if the Supreme Court picked this up, Russ would have top lawyers from all over the country offering to represent him. The case was only brought back from the dead because Russell's lolyers, laughable as they are, actually knew a lick of law and how to apply it correctly!
i won’t pre-empt U_M’s soon to come explanation of why you are wrong, but you are wrong

I'm gonna have to say the Supreme Court taking this case would be against Null's best interests

The case was already about to get dismissed in Utah for Russell's sheer incompetence, and as Null said, if the Supreme Court picked this up, Russ would have top lawyers from all over the country offering to represent him. The case was only brought back from the dead because Russell's lolyers, laughable as they are, actually knew a lick of law and how to apply it correctly!
also, if a team of competent lawyers were going to flock to russell’s defense, that could have happened at any point prior to now and it hasn’t.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
also, if a team of competent lawyers were going to flock to russell’s defense, that could have happened at any point prior to now and it hasn’t.
The possibly most hilarious outcome would be for this to happen, the battle in the oral arguments to be dynamic and sloppy like most pornhub oral, null loses spectacularly, the 10th is upheld, the case is remanded back to the district court, copyright enslaves us to the Mouse forever, the EFF and ACLU merge and disband, and ….

Russ still loses the original lawsuit in district court for being a fuckup.
 
also, if a team of competent lawyers were going to flock to russell’s defense, that could have happened at any point prior to now and it hasn’t.
lawyers would flock to the case not because of its merits or anything about russ, but because getting to argue a case (any case) before the supreme court is a huge mark of prestige in the legal profession
 
i won’t pre-empt U_M’s soon to come explanation of why you are wrong, but you are wrong
It's literally about finances, bro. Would you rather be forced to potentially litigate every single one of the links in the website, or would you rather not do that if possible?
 
if their definition of prestige is defending a captial moron, in the face of the capital court of the USA, then yes. it’s a mark of … something. if it gets there, fine. but are you coming before the court with a legitimate issue, or are you willing to go for clout and ultimately fail?
 
if their definition of prestige is defending a captial moron, in the face of the capital court of the USA, then yes. it’s a mark of … something. if it gets there, fine. but are you coming before the court with a legitimate issue, or are you willing to go for clout and ultimately fail?
It’s literally “didn’t matter had sex”. It’s so rare that many lawyers who argue one case never get a second.
 
Ricky Gervais
I mean, I can see it, sort of. He's played a retard before.
Screenshot_20240302-220212.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: SargonF00t
Didn't someone say if Russ were smart he could've gotten the extension by saying "This case is being appealed to the Supreme Court so we should stay any proceedings in this court until the case has been accepted or not"?

Would that mean the Supreme Court petition makes Russ more likely to get his 90 day stay?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Useful_Mistake
Didn't someone say if Russ were smart he could've gotten the extension by saying "This case is being appealed to the Supreme Court so we should stay any proceedings in this court until the case has been accepted or not"?

Would that mean the Supreme Court petition makes Russ more likely to get his 90 day stay?
Actually, yes, if he raises the issue.
 
Back