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

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

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

  • This Month

    Votes: 67 14.8%
  • Next Month

    Votes: 55 12.1%
  • This Year

    Votes: 72 15.9%
  • Next Year

    Votes: 152 33.5%
  • Whenever he issues an update to the sanctions

    Votes: 108 23.8%

  • Total voters
    454
There's a simple fucking thing Greer could do, that is painfully obvious, because anyone who has ever even seen part of a courthouse knows it, and yet he categorically refuses to do it.

It's hilarious. I'm not going to mention it because he's probably stupid enough to not realize it, as opposed to actively choosing not to do it.
There's a lot of people who have actually never really been to their local court house and wouldnt know...and most who have just go straight to wherever you get whatever permit/pay traffic ticket and leave, so I'm not surprised if even people following this thread dont know what you're talking about because they've never observed a live trial or walked around outside their courthouse to see it.

1740066495422.png
You have to go to the court yard to find it typically.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He was sent it on Jan. 29, 2025 by Mr. Hardin

Guarantee he didn't remember that conversation. Plus, there's a new supplement on it for today.

Bold of you to assume that means he ever read it

He responded to it at the time, threatening Hardin with sanctions of his own. "Don't sanction me and I won't sanction you" is approximately how it went.
 
Mr Greer said he would still make the call, but wanted to know if Mr Moon was privately recording the conversations and posting them onto his website.
Something you can easily verify yourself and not a valid justification for refusing to progress your own case.

Greer does not appreciate the conversations between Hardin and Greer being posted onto Kiwi Farms
The conversations are accessible regardless of whether they're on the Farms or not. Precisely how much did you learn in Paralegal school?

Mr Hardin has threatened to file sanctions against Greer for simply wanting their conversations to remain private.
No, he threatened sanctions for you continuing to misappropriate the SPO. In the interests of justice, court filings should be as accessible as reasonably possible. You wouldn't want people assuming that Ariana Grande wasn't a big fat meanie based on court records they can't see, right?

Hardin said he would withdraw his motion, depending on how he likes Greer's response.
Correct. Promising to provide relevant material and then not doing that sounds sanctionable to me.

defendant's want information regarding cases filed that have nothing to do with copyrights or intellectual property.
It's absolutely relevant. You just don't understand how.

This Court has already dismissed non-copyright claims, so it's unfair for plaintiff to have to provide irrelevant information
Your non-existent restraining order against Jersh is relevant, according to you.

DEFENDANTS HAVE BEEN THE ONLY WEBSITE TO NOT COMPLY WITH A DMCA TAKEDOWN REQUEST
Demonstrably false.

This case would have never been filed had Moon simply just removed Plaintiff's copyrights and just simply removed Greer from the kiwi farms website
The Farms isn't hosting infringing material. The mocking will continue until the clownery ceases.

Plaintiff did kindly go out of his way and did provide a "litigation history" document
Incomplete and did not contain relevant documents. You are in the unique position of knowing precisely how many frivolous lawsuits you've brought. It's also as "burdensome" for you to access PACER as it is for anyone else.

Granting the 10th Circuit precedent, which has a strong history of being against fishing expeditions
Threatening to tattle to the 10th about your gross misunderstanding of the law again.

The judge is sure to be receptive to this knee jerk horse shit, Russ. Keep going! :story:
 
View attachment 7004226
Thanks, Russ, for allowing us to laugh at your zuper sekrit e-mails to Hardship Harden.
Inquiry: If someone marks a document as confidential and for attorneys' eyes only, can they break the confidentiality whenever they want? Can they break the confidentiality they themselves have set up?
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Defendant's REPEATED requests for documentation regarding Plaintiff's history of vexatious litigation is an abuse of the court's time and resources and is frankly irrelevant to Plaintiff's current undertaking of vexatious litigation, as stated in case Just believe me Vs Clearly defined Rules & Regulations. Defendant's pet attack dog continually harasses Plaintiff for documents and responses without realizing that Plaintiff IS TOO BUSY TO DEAL WITH THIS. Plaintiff simply cannot sit down for a set amount of time, do research regarding relevant case law, construct a reasonable argument with that knowledge and then file it prior to a deadline. Defendant has no idea how many models there are on Instagram and LinkedIn, and Plaintiff has a duty to contact every one of them multiple times. Defendant's incessant filings regarding this case is interfering with Plaintiff's ability to live a meaningful life by forcing him to acknowledge and submit these knee-jerk reaction filings explaining why he is not participating in his litigation in a meaningful or productive way, Defendant is forcing the Plaintiff to break the rules by telling him to obey them.
 
Back