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

[Bogliacci]

Well I'm sure Greer will take this as a win as soon as he sees the word withdrawal, he got Hardin to withdraw something after all!

Just ignore where Hardin points out Greer is obviously fucking with the court when he listed a corpse as eager to testify.

Another catch 22 set up for the court to use on him. Let's see if they don't just ignore it though.

 

[Sneedfully and Peacefully]

"We withdraw our call to put this retard on blast for withholding a witness' information because this nigga actually dead. By the way don't forget it's been a year since he died and this retard said he was good to testify 4 months later."

I can't wait for the retard reply.

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

Listing a dead man as a witness is going to bite Russell in the butt for years after this. He'll never be able to file a lawsuit again without it getting brought up.

 

[East_Clintwood]

Can't wait for Russ to inevitably cite this as another example of the Hardinship bullying the poor pro-se retard and the court with unnecessary filings, while ignoring exactly why Hardin had to file in the first place.

 

[Allied-Mastercomputer]

Hmmmm!

Hoo boy, I can’t wait for more sanctions. What a zealous defense Hardin is putting up!

 

[The Man With No Name]

Well I'm sure Greer will take this as a win as soon as he sees the word withdrawal, he got Hardin to withdraw something after all!

Just ignore where Hardin points out Greer is obviously fucking with the court when he listed a corpse as eager to testify.

I can't wait for the retard reply.

Now comes the plaintiff

As you can see, janny-judge, the defendants have withdrawn their motion, which means I win the case because they're forfeiting!

Impose sanctions on Hardin NOW NOW NOW!

 

[AnOminous]

Hmmmm!

View attachment 6966982

View attachment 6966985View attachment 6966986View attachment 6966988

Don't Rule 11 motions have to be filed only after being served on the defendant?

 

[LiquidChrisRespecter]

Don't Rule 11 motions have to be filed only after being served on the defendant?

If I'm reading this correctly, The Hardship needs to give Russ 21 days to come up with a reasonable explanation for shuffling the case around jurisdictions for a corpse first.

 

[obsdj]

Don't Rule 11 motions have to be filed only after being served on the defendant?

Well, Hardin did send that sanction document to Greer previously (the one we never got to see), after which Greer tried to play "don't sanction me and I won't sanction you":

 

[Prokhor Zakharov]

I love it.

Defendants cannot establish Mr. Greer is responsible for the circumstances that rendered Mr. Taylor unavailable in this case.

'We are unable to prove to the degree required by the court that Mr. Greer murdered Mr. Taylor thus rendering him unable to testify'

That is hilarious.

 

[h3catoncheries]

Yeah makes sense given that the AI can be gained only if a party is proven to be the cause of loss of evidence or a witness.
And good move to not wait for the Court to do the determination, builds good will and it's another chance to wave Russ's lies and bad faith in front of the Court, hopefully it doesn't go unnoticed.

 

[BoomerPrime]

I love it.

'We are unable to prove to the degree required by the court that Mr. Greer murdered Mr. Taylor thus rendering him unable to testify'

That is hilarious.

"Your Honor, we are unable to prove that Mr. Taylor up and minecrafted as a result of being dragged into Plaintiff's retarded litigation, therefore we withdraw our motion."

 

[UncleTusky]

Don't mind me, just uploading the Magistrate Judge's ruling on the motion to compel.

Hardin got what he wanted:

CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Therefore, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ short form discovery motion to compel Mr. Greer to comply with
Defendants’ First Request for Production is GRANTED.
2. Mr. Greer shall produce a copy of the restraining order filed against Mr. Moon in
2018 in Utah to Defendants on or before February 24, 2025.
3. Mr. Greer shall submit briefing on the issue of Rule 37(a)(5)(A) fees on or before
February 24, 2025

But sadly the Magistrate did not give us a six-page ruling this time around.

Highlights:
* Greer never responded to the motion for short form discovery, so it was granted as a default.
* The Judge is getting snarky and uses Greer's own words as proof the restraining order he offered to send (but never did) as proof it is relevant.
* This is being treated as a discovery violation, and Greer has two weeks from today (so due date 24 February 2025) to file a briefing showing why he should not be ordered to pay Hardin's fees. I for one am looking forward to Plights 2: Electric Boogaloo. The briefing is capped at five pages and there is no mention of Hardin having an opportunity to respond.
* The wording is a bit clunky - the only specific production the Magistrate ordered was for the restraining order, but the underlying motion by Defendants (ECF #219) cites it as just one piece of proof that Greer has not complied with his discovery obligations.

My thoughts:
* First and foremost it looks like Hardin has learned the Magistrate Judge's game - sanctions that will (well, should) get this case to trial quicker will be granted while dismissal or exclusion of evidence ahead of summary judgment or a trial is a no-go.
* This is not the last time we will see the attempted restraining order. Assuming the docket in the main Greer thread is accurate and Russ doesn't fabricate or withhold evidence, the deputies flat-out told him they could not grant the order, let alone without giving Null the opportunity to respond, because the speech in question was most likely protected. It would fit nicely in a list of evidence this case was brought in bad faith and Gimpface needs to be designated as a vexatious litigant.
* Whether through obliviousness or fear of being overruled, the Judge is still treating this like a normal case - sanctions are not going to make Crusty Rusty behave and might even have the opposite effect, but the rulings don't reflect that.

 

[306h4Ge5eJUJ]

I'm hoping for a Motion to Sanction Opposing Counsel For Implying I Might Have Killed My Witness.

 

[Harm]

Hey, I wonder how Greer's plans to weaponize Null's attorney fees against him is going...



Play retarded games, win hilarious prizes, or something!

 

[Allied-Mastercomputer]

Oh look, MORE attorney’s fees Greer may have to pay if he doesn’t get off his ass. This is, of course, assuming the restraining order is a true and honest document. If he happened to make it all up and the judge compelled him to produce a document he lied about the existence of, I’m not sure he’d look so favorably on that.

 

[Third World Aristocrat]

Don't mind me, just uploading the Magistrate Judge's ruling on the motion to compel

Greer is not only compelled to produce this restraining order against Null, but he also must explain to the court why he should not pay Hardin's fees for bringing the motion to compel.




It appears things are getting increasingly costly for Greer by the day, huh?

 

[and six goriilion others]

the court HEREBY ORDERS Mr. Greer to submit briefing on or before February 24, 2025, showing cause why the court should not require him to pay Defendants’ reasonable expenses incurred in bringing the instant motion to compel.

Aww shit, here we go again. We're not even done with the first one!

 

[S.C.U.D.]

Greer is not only compelled to produce this restraining order against Null, but he also must explain to the court why he should not pay Hardin's fees for bringing the motion to compel.

View attachment 6967569
View attachment 6967567

It appears things are getting increasingly costly for Greer by the day, huh?

He will not do the first one, but the second one allows him to plightsperg so he will 100% file a bunch of whining which he thinks is showing cause.

 

[LiquidChrisRespecter]

Mr. Greer must produce a copy of the requested restraining order to Defendants because
Mr. Greer has indicated that this document is relevant to his claims and that he is willing to
provide a copy to Defendants.

Mr. Greer states he would be “happy to
provide [Defendants] with a copy of the restraining order,” apparently conceding that he has
access to this single document and that producing it is not inconvenient, expensive, or overly
burdensome to Mr. Greer.