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

[Useful_Mistake]

At this point, the totality of what Greer has (or more accurately hasn't) given to Hardin isn't in the record yet, is it?

By statements it is. Mr. Hardin has introduced into record Greer's statements that he has no evidence relating to copyright.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.utd.148809/gov.uscourts.utd.148809.207.2.pdf

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Can the judge dismiss or pause a case based on refusal or inability to pay discovery sanctions?

ChatGPT Esq. opines:

1. In Forma Pauperis (IFP) Status:
   • An IFP plaintiff has been granted the right to proceed without paying filing fees due to indigence. Courts are aware of the financial hardship of such litigants, which can affect how sanctions are imposed or enforced.
   • Courts generally try to avoid dismissing cases solely because of a plaintiff's inability to pay monetary sanctions if doing so would effectively bar access to justice.
2. Discovery Sanctions:
   • Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, sanctions can be imposed for failure to comply with discovery orders, including fines or dismissal of claims.
   • However, the court must consider whether the sanction is just and proportional. For indigent plaintiffs, non-monetary sanctions (e.g., limiting evidence or warnings) are often preferred over financial penalties.
3. Dismissal for Non-Payment:
   • Dismissal is considered an extreme measure and is typically only used when the plaintiff’s conduct demonstrates bad faith, willful noncompliance, or flagrant disregard for court orders.
   • If a plaintiff’s failure to pay is due to genuine inability rather than willful refusal, courts are less likely to dismiss the case, as this could raise constitutional concerns regarding access to justice (especially in civil rights or public interest cases).
4. Possible Actions by the Judge:
   • The judge may pause (stay) the case temporarily to allow time for the plaintiff to address the sanctions or comply with discovery orders.
   • Alternatively, the judge might modify the sanctions, convert them into a non-monetary form, or seek other remedies to ensure compliance without unduly penalizing indigent plaintiffs.
5. Case Law and Precedent:
   • Courts have ruled that financial sanctions must be reasonable and take into account the litigant's ability to pay (e.g., Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752 (1980)).
   • Dismissing a case solely for non-payment without exploring alternatives could be overturned on appeal as an abuse of discretion.

Conclusion:​

A judge has the authority to pause or dismiss a case for failure to comply with discovery sanctions, but when an IFP plaintiff is involved, the court is likely to take a more cautious approach. The judge would likely explore other remedies before resorting to dismissal or pause due to non-payment, as this could unfairly penalize an indigent plaintiff and infringe on their right to access the courts.

 

[and six goriilion others]

is the judge slowly plodding through all the motions? I thought the two witnesses thing was already stipulated away later.

I'm not going to look back at what was filed when exactly, but kinda. He's looking at what happened before certain dates, while considering arguments from later dates. I believe that's what he's supposed to do. Greer had to disclose witnesses, and he did at some point. That he later did a stipulation to undo the thing that just happened doesn't matter for the question if Greer disclosed witnesses. It matters for different questions about if Greer is fucking the court.
Also the last court document I believe specifically says 2 witnesses (later withdrawn). So there the judge is at least mentioning what happened later for context, that and the tone of the judge indicates he's at least seen a lot of it. Honestly it's a shitshow. Because one side is consistently not adhering to the rules you just triple the amount of motions with half of them being after the deadline because one side needs to point out how the other side is fucking up, and then the other side says nuh uh. There's no way to cleanly rule on this shit because you need to consider some late stuff, but considering it all would mean you'd never be able to rule on anything.

 

[Jacknife]

By statements it is. Mr. Hardin has introduced into record Greer's statements that he has no evidence relating to copyright.
View attachment 6872162

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.utd.148809/gov.uscourts.utd.148809.207.2.pdf

Nothing relevant at this time??

Is it normal that plaintiffs can just wait for evidence to materialize?

 

[Iron Hamster]

Nothing relevant at this time??

Is it normal that plaintiffs can just wait for evidence to materialize?

The evidence should be the basis for the action to begin with I would think.

 

[Moths]

Nothing relevant at this time??

Is it normal that plaintiffs can just wait for evidence to materialize?

I think its safe to say that this case is rather lacking in the amount of ordinary things happening so far.

You'd think the charitable thing to do for the plaintiff would be to dismiss for lack of evidence without prejudice so the case can be refiled with evidence so it doesn't look like an absolute dog's breakfast but I don't think any of us are capable of predicting the twisted mind of a federal judge.

 

[Thomas Talus]

You'd think the charitable thing to do for the plaintiff would be to dismiss for lack of evidence without prejudice so the case can be refiled

It's past the statute of limitations, so any dismissal is effectively with prejudice.

 

[GayestFurryTrash]

I think its safe to say that this case is rather lacking in the amount of ordinary things happening so far.

You'd think the charitable thing to do for the plaintiff would be to dismiss for lack of evidence without prejudice so the case can be refiled with evidence so it doesn't look like an absolute dog's breakfast but I don't think any of us are capable of predicting the twisted mind of a federal judge.

The breakfasts I make for my dogs look significantly better than Shitlips’ legal filings.

Sent from my iPhone

6

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

The breakfasts I make for my dogs look significantly better than Shitlips’ legal filings.

Super low bar.
You know what you are doing when making breakfast for your dogs, plus you actually give a fuck about the way your work is received. Neither of which can be honestly stated about Plaintiff Russell Greer.

 

[Disgruntled Pupper]

I am once again petitioning Mr. Hardin to just start shitposting at the judge until he stops hand-holding the Tard. It's worked for Greer so far, there's no shame in adopting your opponent's winning strategy. This is clown world and we're just living in it.

 

[Bogliacci]

The judge has no compunction against skewering the Hardship if he steps one inch out of line

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

The best way for Hardin to shitpost at the judge is to play his game and treat every single thing from Russ as if it were from the best lawyer in the land.

 

[Debbie Macomber]

It's even funnier now that Russell refused to pay into an escrow because there's no possible way he could end up having to pay Hardin!

 

[Harvey Danger]

You'd think the charitable thing to do for the plaintiff would be to dismiss for lack of evidence without prejudice so the case can be refiled with evidence so it doesn't look like an absolute dog's breakfast but I don't think any of us are capable of predicting the twisted mind of a federal judge.

The one benefit of the doubt I'm willing to give this judge is that maybe he is angling for appeal-proof dismissal with prejudice, or summary judgement, But he;s still burning Josh's money to get there, knowing full well that in forma pauperis Greer will never reimburse Josh.

 

[Thomas Talus]

The one benefit of the doubt I'm willing to give this judge is that maybe he is angling for appeal-proof dismissal with prejudice, or summary judgement,

I don't think there's a "maybe" about it.

 

[Harvey Danger]

I don't think there's a "maybe" about it.

I still think he wants a full trial. Maybe I'm misinterpreting, and he's actually wanting a fully argued and delivered SJ. Either way he's wasting Josh's money on a project. He stopped playing lawyer for Russ to start playing lawyer for his own cause of "why this stupid case should continue".

 

[Suah Noteb]

The one benefit of the doubt I'm willing to give this judge is that maybe he is angling for appeal-proof dismissal with prejudice, or summary judgement, But he;s still burning Josh's money to get there, knowing full well that in forma pauperis Greer will never reimburse Josh.

Josh had gotten donations to help him get started, and after this he'll have a passive income from Greer he could set up to autopay the bills for keeping the kiwifarms online.

 

[AnOminous]

I think it's possible to look at the judge's ruling and see him saying, "What you are asking for is summary judgment, and you have to file a motion for summary judgment to get that."

Two different things. Summary judgment is a ruling on the merits. Terminating sanctions are a punishment for misconduct and can dispose of even a meritorious claim.

 

[niggercattle]

Now why would he be a heavily active moderator on a website that, although does not cover basket weaving, is considered to have a very poor reputation among people outside the site - enough to hinder his line of work if he was discovered to be involved?

The pay's worth the risk.

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

I still think he wants a full trial. Maybe I'm misinterpreting, and he's actually wanting a fully argued and delivered SJ. Either way he's wasting Josh's money on a project. He stopped playing lawyer for Russ to start playing lawyer for his own cause of "why this stupid case should continue".

Wants to have the case decided on the merits (or lack thereof) rather than procedural errors. I see a few options:

A) Russ can't pay and keeps doing stupid shit. Case gets held up even longer for that but eventually is dismissed.
B) Russ eventually pays or the amount is ignored because he isn't doing as much stupid shit. Discovery ends and there is no way that Russ can present a winnable case based on the evidence, ends on summary judgement. That's the merits though Russ will appeal.
C) Russ eventually pays these costs or they are ignored, suddenly becomes marginally competent or is gifted some more lawyers and the whole thing survives to trial.

I think the middle ground is the most likely. Still expensive as shit for a plaintiff that likely won't pay