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

[Bloodfeast Island Man]

The latter, but the case will be dismissed if he doesn't.

That's disappointing.

 

[obsdj]

@AnOminous I'll be happy to accept your apologies anytime now.

 

[Welfare Bum]

Shitlips sounded so somber with that $402 ordered to come out of his hooker fund.

 

[Dizzyuntildeath]

I got the feeling the when he first joined the meeting Mr. Greer was in a public place and I could hear background noise and clattering which cleared up later as if he stepped out to somewhere private. But I could be insane. He also zoned out a lot and went dead silent for a while and lagged to respond.

 

[Sneed Force One]

Conclusion: Not TOTAL DROOLING DEATH, but Greer is severely beaten down. The court is not impressed at all with his bullshit.

 

[4090 Chad]

Is this a one time fee he has to pay or does he have to pay every time he files going forward?

 

[SCV]

Good job with the behavior everyone. But remember to mute your mic next time Dan Smith.

 

[Pedophobe]

Summary:
Attorney's fees payable by Russ stays at $1000
Russ's request for a bond/appeal of these fees is denied because he cited the wrong rule
Discovery is stayed until motion to dismiss can be ruled on.
Ruling on defense's request for further sanctions for discovery fuckery postponed (taken under advisement).
Greer must produce the alleged restraining order docs from state court, Hardin to report if he does or not. Docs to be marked confidential under the standard protection order.
IFP status denied, Greer must pay the filing fee.

Impressively efficient work by the judge, all done in under an hour.

 

[Empress Nympho]

Russ needs to give Judge a status report in 21 days

No, Hardin needs to give the status report within 21 days. They gave the responsibility to the grown-up in the room.

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

Motion to stay discovery - no response so will grant until ct can decide motion to dismiss. Hardin agrees re stay but 2 other people haven't been disclosed under rule 26 as having discoverable info. G - didn't respond, don't oppose but nawt true they don't have info bc one infringed copyright and Russtard was conspiring to infringe. Was only trying to find out how to serve these people. If you stay, will file subpoena to find out how to serve them. H- G said he over- disclosed now saying these 2 have info but he's never disclosed them. Make it make sense. Inappropriate. CT- tf you can amend. H- he filed under 26a and never disclosed. No new facts since initial disclosure but now says he needs info. Serving amended complaint makes no sense bc g has never said they - or j - has disc'able info. Out of proportion rule 26 violation. Also stat of limitations vs those 2 expired. CT - going fwd. [Ugh a/v issues.] 26e doesn't require Flyspecking of disclosures.

Ecf 251 - bonded stay for sanctions. CT - judgment = final judgment; rule 62b is about appeal of entire case so n/a. But bc is interlocutory he can ask Barlow to stay the payment but Bennett cannot do that. Can't rule on 251. Would deny bc n/a but must appeal to Barlow based on his inherent authority. Greer understands.

Ecf 253 and 258 - IFP status. CT- 258 is alternative motion bc if not IFP would just proceed so 258 only applies if IFP applies. Hardin agrees. So for 253: CT: G states is able but unwilling to pay sanction so H argues G can pay filing fee. CT asks G if can pay filing fee of $400. G - yes but H focuses on all these little thing & don't see how IFP status is relevant to copyright infringement. CT - right IFP irrelevant to case but it does have to do with whether CT can hear the case. If you can pay must pay. If you can pay must pay within 30 days or will dismiss. Asks G if he can survive if pays, G says yes. Ordered. 258 moot. If no pay, will dismiss.

CT sums up with all to dos for parties and court, and rulings on various motions. 243 will stay open pending status report/ production on RO disclosure. Done!

 

[The Un-Clit]

i also got zoom cucked. i was IN, damn it!!

Same here. I was waiting to join, soon as I was accepted in the bitch ass app errored out and I was in lobby hell forever after, fuck my life.

Waited SO long and zoomcucked in the end. At least I have the makings for a roaring drunk.

Please keep the feed of info going Kiwibros, so far it sounds like all I wanted it to be.

 

[Hoi Polloi]

That's disappointing.

His admission that he's entirely within his means and therefore doesn't need IFP status is a spectacularly retarded thing for him to have admitted. Even without the Judge laying into him for it (which he was never going to do) it was hilarious to listen to. He truly didn't understand the ramifications of what he was saying.

 

[Unkraut]

Wasn't willful misrepresentation of IFP status considered cause for dismissal in itself? I'd have to track back a couple dozen pages to an ECF Hardin filed on that.

 

[ScooterL]

Shit, is Greer zoning out again, as he does when things don't go his way (as per his own book)?

Yes. Dreaming of Taylor* at Cold Stone.

(*Swift, not Steve)

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Is this a one time fee he has to pay or does he have to pay every time he files going forward?

One time.

 

[God's strongest milkman]

So if he just doesn't have any proof of a restraining order what happens?

 

[Unknown God]

The thread is blowing up so maybe late but, have you noticed how Hardin says "Russtard" twice without so much as cracking even a hint of a smile? I would bet money that he had to coach himself for a little bit before being able to achieve this.

 

[Complete Reprobate]

Thanks to all for being well mannered. Kiwis keep it clean in court as a tradition, and we continued that today. Thanks again

(C'mon, Dan...)

 

[Jaded Optimist]

So someone wants to explain "conspiring to infringe"? Lol

 

[Prokhor Zakharov]

Looks like there is more than one potential angle on which this case can be dismissed at this point.

I think Hardin made a strong representation on why the case should be dismissed through Rule 11(b), the judge seemed less than convinced though, which is annoying.