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

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

  • This Month

    Votes: 67 14.4%
  • Next Month

    Votes: 56 12.1%
  • This Year

    Votes: 73 15.7%
  • Next Year

    Votes: 155 33.4%
  • Whenever he issues an update to the sanctions

    Votes: 113 24.4%

  • Total voters
    464
null, aka the designated court nigger
Pretty sure Hardin is getting paid regardless and Lolcow LLC is footing the bill for Greer's shenanigans.
No, that's null. Hardin has been paid for his time. A fee sanction is to take the burden off the defendant.
I thought Hardin stated he has wasted billable hours trying to arrange a meet and confer with Greer. As well as wasting money booking rooms for depositions for witnesses that currently do not exist. Including his generously low costs, it looks like he suffers financially in this, which should be the opposite of what this sanction should accomplish.

If this is some kind of symbolic punishment just because it's all the pro se retard can handle then that's extra fucked up.
 
I thought Hardin stated he has wasted billable hours trying to arrange a meet and confer with Greer.
Correct, he did, in ECF228
1739448940858.png

If this is some kind of symbolic punishment just because it's all the pro se retard can handle then that's extra fucked up.
I don't even think these sanctions are supposed to punish, but to make the whole defendents who were unnecessarily forced to spend time and money trying to advance the case, which is actually the plaintiff's job. I mean, sure, TECHNICALLY, it would punish Greer, but their main point should be to make it so Josh gets back the money he shouldn't have had to spend, but was forced to, anyway, because of Russ' shenanigans. It's all just retarded and doesn't make sense unless your nose is red, and it honks when you squeeze it.
 
Last edited:
null, aka the designated court nigger
So let's have a little reimagining of Django Unchained, starring Mr. Moon as Django, Hardin as Dr. Shultz, Greer as Candie and that mean ol judge as Stephen, bound and determine to see our beloved nigger broken in service to the system to which he is shackled. Pick whoever for Broomhilda, I don't care. Melinda or Assley the Hutt.
 
So at what point does it tip from "the process" to a sign of how things will continue to go and maybe ultimately turn out? I feel like people are very fond of chanting this phrase in a cargo-cult like way, but I'm pretty sure you can go beyond the standard "this sucks and the judge is just trying various bluffs, punishments, and bullshittery to make both sides end this in the quickest way possible" to "oh shit only my side getting hammered". At what point should the innate human ability to read the room kick in for you guys?
What the fuck do you think is going to happen? Do you think the judge is going to say Russ wins summary judgment? Or do you think the judge hates him self so much there's going to be a trial?

The district judge essentially just said Russ is going to loose SJ, the judges are pretty clearly just trying to build an appeal proof record because they seems to care more about the case not coming back to them that anything else.
 
On Tuesday I had been thinking, "is it really ok that Hardin only asked for $5500? Surely this case has cost Josh more than that. Doesnt Hardin have an ethical duty to request everything legally obtainable in order to make his client whole?" Silly me when the judge just lowers it to an arbitrary fraction of the already lowball request, mitigation from the bench. And Im reminded why I went into math/stat instead of law. What a joke.
 
Surely this case has cost Josh more than that.

As has been pointed out multiple times, this particular fees and costs order was only for one specific period of time in the case during which Greer engaged in a specific bit of discovery fuckery. He is already under yet another show-cause order for more fuckery, and there will undoubtedly be plenty more going forward. By the time the case ends, he should easily be on the hook for five figures (if we’re being merciful), though of course he will continue to appeal as long as the courts permit him to.
 
As has been pointed out multiple times, this particular fees and costs order was only for one specific period of time in the case during which Greer engaged in a specific bit of discovery fuckery. He is already under yet another show-cause order for more fuckery, and there will undoubtedly be plenty more going forward. By the time the case ends, he should easily be on the hook for five figures (if we’re being merciful), though of course he will continue to appeal as long as the courts permit him to.
youre right but im just going to arbitrarily decide to only grant 20% of what you posted. Sneed
 
Here's a Nevada case knocking down 37b attorneys' fees - aside from reasonableness (mostly reasonable, some trimming for some lumped work, it seemed) and even where the sanctioned pro se litigant had not filed IFP and had a history of "active" litigation.
$156.20/hr is dirt cheap, even for 2014. That's "fresh-out-of-law-school" rates.
 
To me my layman eyes it seems the Magistrate Judge's first show cause order was why Russell shouldn't just pay for the motion to exclude, but after the witness subpoena fuckery increased it to the whole 7 months he "hid the ball" but then the District Judge awarded $1000 only for the original motion to exclude

So could magistrate Judge tell Russell "Fine, $1000 for that one motion, but you STILL are getting sanctioned for the rest of the seven months"?
 
That, in combination with Mr. Greer’s IFP status and the fact that this is this pro se litigant’s first sanction, leads the court to conclude de novo that a lower fee is appropriate
I'm assuming de novo is American-Legalese for "because I fucking feel like it, okay?!".

Hardin's calculation was well-demonstrated and IMHO overgenerous and this magistrate still thinks it's too much for the poor widdle tard who dindu nuffin (ironically, that's probably even how the rat-faced birdbrain says it).

This isn't even a miscarriage of justice, it's an apologetic spritzing of jizz down justices thigh.
 
On Tuesday I had been thinking, "is it really ok that Hardin only asked for $5500? Surely this case has cost Josh more than that. Doesnt Hardin have an ethical duty to request everything legally obtainable in order to make his client whole?" Silly me when the judge just lowers it to an arbitrary fraction of the already lowball request, mitigation from the bench. And Im reminded why I went into math/stat instead of law. What a joke.

Monetary sanctions for this kind of sanction are limited to expenses that would not have been incurred but for the sanctioned party's sanctionable conduct.


^ is Goodyear, which held in 2017 that the sanctioned conduct must be causally related to fees awarded as sanctions*. The Court therefore held that in that case that the awarded fees must relate back only to the sanctioned conduct, not to the first instance of sanctionable conduct.

* Goodyear focuses on inherent authority of courts to fashion sanctions, though it specifically addressed Rule 37 discovery sanctions as requiring the same causality as above.
$156.20/hr is dirt cheap, even for 2014. That's "fresh-out-of-law-school" rates.
I love that the hourly fee that ends in $0.20. The D is the Postmaster General, so I wonder if that was an inhouse counsel salary/hourly equivalent rate, or a contract with weird hourly rates set internally based on some formula equating to an in-house salary, or requiring an across-the-board cut of x% to get on the list of contracting attorneys.
 
I'm assuming de novo is American-Legalese for "because I fucking feel like it, okay?!".
It means for the first time, basically. Magistrate didn't rule on fees, so the District Court wasn't reviewing the mag's decision on that, but instead was making the initial call. I expect they wanted to try to move shit along rather than just agreeing with the mag that fees are appropriate as a concept, having the mag then have to decide and order an amount, Russell to come pestering them again, bitching about the amount, etc.
Hardin's calculation was well-demonstrated and IMHO overgenerous and this magistrate still thinks it's too much for the poor widdle tard who dindu nuffin (ironically, that's probably even how the rat-faced birdbrain says it).
This is not the magistrate's order; it's the District Court's. And they didn't review Hardin's fees, it appears. They did not comment on the reasonableness of them, and did not reference or calculate against them.
 
Hardin's calculation was well-demonstrated and IMHO overgenerous and this magistrate still thinks it's too much for the poor widdle tard who dindu nuffin (ironically, that's probably even how the rat-faced birdbrain says it).
This wasn't the magistrate's doing.
Very little
I'd say about zero.
 
Back