- Joined
- Dec 20, 2019
Does anyone else feel a little disappointed when they check the thread and there hasn't been a new filing that day?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You mean like your post?Does anyone else feel a little disappointed when they check the thread and there hasn't been a new filing that day?
Isn't there a deadline this week to look forward to though?
March 14th is also the date Hardin has given for his response to the amended complaint and the court accepted.I don't think so. The only actual deadline I'm aware of is March 14, by which time Greer has to pay the drastically-reduced sanctions ordered by the District Judge. There are plenty of other open items that the Magistrate should be weighing in on, but maybe he's on vacation or some shit? All last week there was no action from him despite their being multiple motions/filings from previous weeks.
March 14th is also the date Hardin has given for his response to the amended complaint and the court accepted.
I'd think they're two independent threads. Hardin's response is due for his clients, he could again request more time but it doesn't really matter as to the outcome of the stay request. Until/unless the stay is granted discovery continues towards the original date for that and Hardin was just pointing out, "Hey, if there are more parties then this whole discovery thing needs to start over.", where the 'reply to the complaint' is a fairly formal point by point dissection of the complaint. I expect we will see more non-reply motions but the reply is the reply.Is that affected by Hardin's motion to stay discovery until the additional defendants have been served? Or will he need to file additional motions for extension of time on the response?
Does anyone else feel a little disappointed when they check the thread and there hasn't been a new filing that day?
I’d say more like 6 new pages is a good indicator. There’s a handful of people here who can shit up 3 pages of this thread with Russ-level retarded takes in just a few hours.You can always tell if the new filing dropped if there's like 3 new pages of the thread since you last time you checked.
First off, it was explained by this Court that there was a standard protective order on 11-18-
24. Although Greer never saw the actual order, it was inferred that everything was protected.
Plaintiff had no idea he had to write “attorneys eyes only.” He was just going off of a blanket
assumption.
HOW COULD YOU HAVE KNOWN THEY VIOLATED AN ORDER YOU ADMIT YOU DIDN'T FUCKING READ? I still do not believe he's read the order. Nothing in this filing indicates he has any fucking understanding of what the order contained. Makes Acerthorn look like Clarence fucking Thomas.Plaintiff simply requested the SPO so he could read it exactly to file a motion of sanctions of
his own
Additionally, it was plaintiff’s opinion, based on facts, that defendants violated the SPO. Plaintiff shouldn’t be sanctioned for expressing his opinion.
In your opinion?Plaintiff replies that Defendants did indeed violate the protection order.
This is just astonishing, especially coming from someone who (sort of) graduated from paralegal school. I genuinely would like for someone to ask him, in a formal setting, exactly what he thinks the role of an attorney, and especially a defense attorney, is. Does he honestly think that their job is to simply roll over and accept whatever he files uncritically and without reply?It’s juvenile, in a way, that defendants continue to protest everything.
It's been said a few times that Plaintiff thinks that Hardin is his attorney (or at least some neutral party) and is being unethical by advocating for his employer. It sounds insane but the more filings he shits out the more I believe it. Like maybe he thinks that because he chose to pursue this pro-se it precludes the defense's ability to be represented as well.I genuinely would like for someone to ask him, in a formal setting, exactly what he thinks the role of an attorney, and especially a defense attorney, is.
Now comes the defendant.This is just astonishing, especially coming from someone who (sort of) graduated from paralegal school. I genuinely would like for someone to ask him, in a formal setting, exactly what he thinks the role of an attorney, and especially a defense attorney, is. Does he honestly think that their job is to simply roll over and accept whatever he files uncritically and without reply?
Also: Why do I get the feeling that he's trying (unsuccessfully,of coursemaybepossiblyI hope) to set up grounds for an appeal?