- Joined
- Jul 7, 2015
You're not incorrect; what you state would fall under the "many things" I made reference to.
Greer v. Moon, No. 20-cv-00647 (D. Utah Sep. 16, 2020)
- Thread starter AnOminous
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2023
I'm betting he practiced in the mirror until he could say it with a straight face.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2022
Very dissapointed that I missed this, sounds like it was a great experience. I hope that audio request gets approved.
Thanks for the huge detail either way! A small summary from many different people comes together to paint the complete picture.
A curiosity, does attorney's eyes only mean that truly only the defendant's counsel can see it? Or is it accessible to the defendants?
If so, isn't Kiwi Farms, a website a defendant?
Obviously trying a loophole like that would piss everyone off, but still fun to think about.
Thanks for the huge detail either way! A small summary from many different people comes together to paint the complete picture.
A curiosity, does attorney's eyes only mean that truly only the defendant's counsel can see it? Or is it accessible to the defendants?
If so, isn't Kiwi Farms, a website a defendant?
Obviously trying a loophole like that would piss everyone off, but still fun to think about.
waffle
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2013
I hope Russ posts the $402 filing fee and then the judge dismisses it on the merits.
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
Just as an aside, I want to apologise for heavy handed moderation before and during the hearing. Despite any actions I may have taken against your posts (or if I even yelled at you after), I'm pretty glad with how you all behaved, and any mistakes seem to be few and unintentional.
(I'm not apologizing for yelling at people regarding RO. Sorry not sorry)
(I'm not apologizing for yelling at people regarding RO. Sorry not sorry)
The Judge specifically warned Mr. Hardin that it is not to end up here.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2021
I handscribbled some notes and just got home and typed them out. Kinda sloppy and IANAL so there were some case numbers which I misheard / fucked up. Every quote here is not a direct quote and may be a summary as I was taking quick notes, but the general sentiment / facts said should be correct. Separate quotes are separate summarized sentences.
Summary-
Judge orders Greer to provide the restraining order in the next 14 days, and to mark it properly as Attorneys Eyes only.
Judge puts the rule 11B sanctions under advisement, and will rule on them /issue an order at a later date.
Judge grants the motion to stay discovery until the court reviews the existing motion to dismiss.
Judge rules that motion ECF 251 is denied, as rule 62B does not apply here. Recommends that Greer bring this up with Judge Barlow.
Judge orders Greer to pay the filing fees in 30 days, otherwise the case is dismissed. IFP status revoked.
Judge opens up by saying they're addressing a series of motions, grouped into 5 categories.
Group1. Motions for Sanctions. Concerns ECF 228 and ECF 243.
ECF 228- sanctions for attorneys fees in the amount of $5000 ($1000?)
Sanctions on rule 37 on a motion to compel. Should fees be awarded? Greer doesn't reply but instead files a different motion.
Judge- “Rule 60B does not apply to this discovery sanction, but I can liberally construe ECB 243 as a response.”
-Dealing with copyright issues
-Failure to disclose is the greater violation
Hardin- “The statement made in the sanction is incorrect. Greer states that he had a restraining order---”
**Greer briefly interrupts Hardin**
Hardin continues. “Greer was denied a court order restraining order- there's no proof the order exists, and Hardin has not seen it. The underlying allegations in the order are incredibly relevant.”
Hardin- “I don't know who Jim Jorton is.”
Judge, to Greer- “Did you provide the documents?”
Greer- “I said I would, then Jim Jorton asked for them” (He thinks that the short time between his call with Hardin where he stated that he would provide the documents and Jim Jorton asking the court for them means that Hardin or someone else leaked the call / information)
Greer- “Probably had an error on my phone”
“I never said I had a restraining order”
Judge-”Greer, why don't you have access to your own court documents?”
Greer- “I have limited space on my phone, so I delete documents, and I don't know how to get the document from the courts.”
Judge- “Sounds like you haven't put in a basic amount of effort to get that document.”
“The motion to compel counts as clear notice from Hardin that he couldn't access that document, so you should have provided it.”
(Greer has some confusion about Hardin asking for the document. Thought that linking him the court website to download them would be enough, but then ignored the motion to compel from Hardin compelling him to hand over the document.)
Greer-“I missed the court order.”
(The judge had thought that Greer had provided the restraining order.)
Judge orders Greer to provide the restraining order in the next 14 days, and to mark it properly as Attorneys Eyes only to assuage his concerns that it will end up on the Kiwifarms. The judge then remarks that if anyone republishes this document illegally, US Marshalls will show up at their door.
As for the attorneys fees, the judge reserves that matter for a status conference. He asks Hardin to write up a report of claimed fees, that will be later gone over in that status conference.
Judge- “If we don't see the documents, we might invoke rule 37B (dismiss the case due to a failure to complete discovery)
Group 2. Rule 11 Sanctions, pertainingto ECF 234
ECF 234- claiming that Joshua Moon violated a protective order that Greer had not read.
Hardin - “Greer attempted to use a dead witness.”
Judge- “Greer, why did you say that Mr. Taylor was eager to testify despite not speaking with him for (a long time)?”
Greer- “I should have corroborated that he was still eager, I didn't know he was dead”
Hardin- “The motion for sanctions should fail, because Greer did not do his due diligence.”
-Didn't talk to Mr. Taylor for 3 years and still used him as a witness
-Didn't know Mr. Taylor was dead
-The case was then moved to Utah, not singly because of Mr. Taylor, but in part because Mr. Taylor was unable to appear in court in Florida. (despite Taylor being dead.)
Judge puts the rule 11B sanctions under advisement, and will rule on them /issue an order at a later date. Hardin has 21 days to file a response.
Judge- “Hardin, what do we do about this? What should the sanction be?”
Hardin- “It should be whatever attorneys fees pertain to Steve Taylor, but that may not be enough to remedy this.”
“This case was moved to Utah out of Florida because of this.”
“I think that at this point, acceptable sanctions would be the dismissal of this case.”
“This case can go nowhere- Greer has no witnesses, and its obvious that the court system has been abused here.”
Greer-”I need Joshua Moon's address to contact the police.”
“There is nothing here that makes this case unwinnable.”
“I have proof of Joshua Moon abusing mine and others copyright”
Judge- “We have to pursue our legal actions in accordance with the law.”
“We have to be reasonable and investigate our self representation properly.”
Group 3. Motion to Stay Discovery- ECT 225 / ECF 275(missed the number here. I'm a retard.)
Judge grants the motion to stay discovery until the court reviews the existing motion to dismiss.
Hardin- “Neither Russtard Or Moseph Jartelli have been disclosed to have any discoverable information.”
“I don't think there's anywhere discovery can go that isn't out of proportion to this case.”
Greer- “I didn't respond because I'm opposed to this.”
“One of them infringed my copyright, the other one was conspiring to do so.”
Hardin-“Greer was overzealous to disclose witnesses, but never disclosed these two people with discoverable information.”
Hardin- “He is here, confessing in open court to a rule 26 violation.”
Judge- “He is allowed under a subsection of Rule 26 to amend his discovery document”
Hardin-”He never amended the document.”
“He never said Joshua moon has any discoverable information, he now wants Josh to give up discoverable info” (Moseph Jartelli / Russtard's email addresses)
“Any copyright issue against them expired 2-3 year sago”
Judge- “address this point Hardin- some of these disclosures have already been made.”
“Even if Joshua Moon is not in the list of people with discoverable information, he is the named defendant, he should obviously have discoverable information.”
(Judge defends Greer for a bit, mentioning rule26E which I think allows him to update his filings.)
Hardin- “We will renew or motion based on what Russel Greer has said.”
Group 4.ECF 251, relating to a bondage stay
Judge- “This refers to a final judgment, not an interlocutory discovery sanctions. Rule 62Bdoes not apply here.”
“He can ask the previous judge, judge Barlow to stay the $1000 payment, but I as another judge cannot overrule a higher judges judgment.”
Judge rules that motion ECF 251 is denied, as rule 62B does not apply here. Recommends that Greer bring this up with Judge Barlow.
Group 5. In Forma Pauperis- ECF 253 and ECF258
Judge- “Hardin states here that Greer says that he is able to pay a $1000 sanction, therefore he should be able to pay the filing fees. Can you pay the filing fees,Mr Greer?”
Greer- “I don't see how my IFP status has relevance to the copyright infringement.”
“I can pay the filing fees.”
Judge- “Well, then you have to pay the filing fees.”
Judge orders Greer to pay the filing fees in 30 days, otherwise the case is dismissed. IFP status revoked.
(Judge attempts to give Greer an out here.)
Judge- “Will paying the filing fees interfere with(lawyer speak for living costs)? Can you still pay rent /utilities?”
Greer- “Yeah, I can pay.”
Judge- “Then pay the filing fees.”
(Greer hurt himself in his confusion!)
As a result of the order to pay filing fees, ECF 253 is now moot. ECF(251?) is denied, (228 and 243?) are now moot awaiting a report.
Since all the points are covered, the judge asks if Hardin / Greer have any additional issues they want to raise. Neither raise any further issues, so the judge adjourns the hearing.
Group1. Motions for Sanctions. Concerns ECF 228 and ECF 243.
ECF 228- sanctions for attorneys fees in the amount of $5000 ($1000?)
Sanctions on rule 37 on a motion to compel. Should fees be awarded? Greer doesn't reply but instead files a different motion.
Judge- “Rule 60B does not apply to this discovery sanction, but I can liberally construe ECB 243 as a response.”
-Dealing with copyright issues
-Failure to disclose is the greater violation
Hardin- “The statement made in the sanction is incorrect. Greer states that he had a restraining order---”
**Greer briefly interrupts Hardin**
Hardin continues. “Greer was denied a court order restraining order- there's no proof the order exists, and Hardin has not seen it. The underlying allegations in the order are incredibly relevant.”
Hardin- “I don't know who Jim Jorton is.”
Judge, to Greer- “Did you provide the documents?”
Greer- “I said I would, then Jim Jorton asked for them” (He thinks that the short time between his call with Hardin where he stated that he would provide the documents and Jim Jorton asking the court for them means that Hardin or someone else leaked the call / information)
Greer- “Probably had an error on my phone”
“I never said I had a restraining order”
Judge-”Greer, why don't you have access to your own court documents?”
Greer- “I have limited space on my phone, so I delete documents, and I don't know how to get the document from the courts.”
Judge- “Sounds like you haven't put in a basic amount of effort to get that document.”
“The motion to compel counts as clear notice from Hardin that he couldn't access that document, so you should have provided it.”
(Greer has some confusion about Hardin asking for the document. Thought that linking him the court website to download them would be enough, but then ignored the motion to compel from Hardin compelling him to hand over the document.)
Greer-“I missed the court order.”
(The judge had thought that Greer had provided the restraining order.)
Judge orders Greer to provide the restraining order in the next 14 days, and to mark it properly as Attorneys Eyes only to assuage his concerns that it will end up on the Kiwifarms. The judge then remarks that if anyone republishes this document illegally, US Marshalls will show up at their door.
As for the attorneys fees, the judge reserves that matter for a status conference. He asks Hardin to write up a report of claimed fees, that will be later gone over in that status conference.
Judge- “If we don't see the documents, we might invoke rule 37B (dismiss the case due to a failure to complete discovery)
Group 2. Rule 11 Sanctions, pertainingto ECF 234
ECF 234- claiming that Joshua Moon violated a protective order that Greer had not read.
Hardin - “Greer attempted to use a dead witness.”
Judge- “Greer, why did you say that Mr. Taylor was eager to testify despite not speaking with him for (a long time)?”
Greer- “I should have corroborated that he was still eager, I didn't know he was dead”
Hardin- “The motion for sanctions should fail, because Greer did not do his due diligence.”
-Didn't talk to Mr. Taylor for 3 years and still used him as a witness
-Didn't know Mr. Taylor was dead
-The case was then moved to Utah, not singly because of Mr. Taylor, but in part because Mr. Taylor was unable to appear in court in Florida. (despite Taylor being dead.)
Judge puts the rule 11B sanctions under advisement, and will rule on them /issue an order at a later date. Hardin has 21 days to file a response.
Judge- “Hardin, what do we do about this? What should the sanction be?”
Hardin- “It should be whatever attorneys fees pertain to Steve Taylor, but that may not be enough to remedy this.”
“This case was moved to Utah out of Florida because of this.”
“I think that at this point, acceptable sanctions would be the dismissal of this case.”
“This case can go nowhere- Greer has no witnesses, and its obvious that the court system has been abused here.”
Greer-”I need Joshua Moon's address to contact the police.”
“There is nothing here that makes this case unwinnable.”
“I have proof of Joshua Moon abusing mine and others copyright”
Judge- “We have to pursue our legal actions in accordance with the law.”
“We have to be reasonable and investigate our self representation properly.”
Group 3. Motion to Stay Discovery- ECT 225 / ECF 275(missed the number here. I'm a retard.)
Judge grants the motion to stay discovery until the court reviews the existing motion to dismiss.
Hardin- “Neither Russtard Or Moseph Jartelli have been disclosed to have any discoverable information.”
“I don't think there's anywhere discovery can go that isn't out of proportion to this case.”
Greer- “I didn't respond because I'm opposed to this.”
“One of them infringed my copyright, the other one was conspiring to do so.”
Hardin-“Greer was overzealous to disclose witnesses, but never disclosed these two people with discoverable information.”
Hardin- “He is here, confessing in open court to a rule 26 violation.”
Judge- “He is allowed under a subsection of Rule 26 to amend his discovery document”
Hardin-”He never amended the document.”
“He never said Joshua moon has any discoverable information, he now wants Josh to give up discoverable info” (Moseph Jartelli / Russtard's email addresses)
“Any copyright issue against them expired 2-3 year sago”
Judge- “address this point Hardin- some of these disclosures have already been made.”
“Even if Joshua Moon is not in the list of people with discoverable information, he is the named defendant, he should obviously have discoverable information.”
(Judge defends Greer for a bit, mentioning rule26E which I think allows him to update his filings.)
Hardin- “We will renew or motion based on what Russel Greer has said.”
Group 4.ECF 251, relating to a bondage stay
Judge- “This refers to a final judgment, not an interlocutory discovery sanctions. Rule 62Bdoes not apply here.”
“He can ask the previous judge, judge Barlow to stay the $1000 payment, but I as another judge cannot overrule a higher judges judgment.”
Judge rules that motion ECF 251 is denied, as rule 62B does not apply here. Recommends that Greer bring this up with Judge Barlow.
Group 5. In Forma Pauperis- ECF 253 and ECF258
Judge- “Hardin states here that Greer says that he is able to pay a $1000 sanction, therefore he should be able to pay the filing fees. Can you pay the filing fees,Mr Greer?”
Greer- “I don't see how my IFP status has relevance to the copyright infringement.”
“I can pay the filing fees.”
Judge- “Well, then you have to pay the filing fees.”
Judge orders Greer to pay the filing fees in 30 days, otherwise the case is dismissed. IFP status revoked.
(Judge attempts to give Greer an out here.)
Judge- “Will paying the filing fees interfere with(lawyer speak for living costs)? Can you still pay rent /utilities?”
Greer- “Yeah, I can pay.”
Judge- “Then pay the filing fees.”
(Greer hurt himself in his confusion!)
As a result of the order to pay filing fees, ECF 253 is now moot. ECF(251?) is denied, (228 and 243?) are now moot awaiting a report.
Since all the points are covered, the judge asks if Hardin / Greer have any additional issues they want to raise. Neither raise any further issues, so the judge adjourns the hearing.
Summary-
Judge orders Greer to provide the restraining order in the next 14 days, and to mark it properly as Attorneys Eyes only.
Judge puts the rule 11B sanctions under advisement, and will rule on them /issue an order at a later date.
Judge grants the motion to stay discovery until the court reviews the existing motion to dismiss.
Judge rules that motion ECF 251 is denied, as rule 62B does not apply here. Recommends that Greer bring this up with Judge Barlow.
Judge orders Greer to pay the filing fees in 30 days, otherwise the case is dismissed. IFP status revoked.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2023
What are the potential outcomes of not having paid the sanction? Sanctioning the non-payment of sanction, or something more severe?
I would say, no need to apologize, it was all very necessary, appropriate, and apprecaited.
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2023
So, if I'm not mistaken, we now have no less than six reasons this case may end shortly:
Lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, and failure to state a claim (ECF 274). All of which Greer brought upon himself by trying to get another bite at the apple with his amended complaint.
Next, the possibility of case-ending sanctions: Rule 11, for lying to the Florida court about Steve Taylor, which was the only reason the case went back to Utah.
Rule 37, if he fails or refuses to cough up the documents regarding his non-existent restraining order.
And finally, failing to pay the filing fees.
Wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to dismissal.
So, any educated guess from our in-house counsel how this will go forward, provided that Greer doesn't simply ignore the court on the things he could actually remedy?
Lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, and failure to state a claim (ECF 274). All of which Greer brought upon himself by trying to get another bite at the apple with his amended complaint.
Next, the possibility of case-ending sanctions: Rule 11, for lying to the Florida court about Steve Taylor, which was the only reason the case went back to Utah.
Rule 37, if he fails or refuses to cough up the documents regarding his non-existent restraining order.
And finally, failing to pay the filing fees.
Wide is the gate and broad is the way that leadeth to dismissal.
So, any educated guess from our in-house counsel how this will go forward, provided that Greer doesn't simply ignore the court on the things he could actually remedy?
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
If only there were some sort of "Standard" Protective Order one could read for this information.
So, no, Hardin can't even disclose it to Lolcow LLC/Null/etc.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2021
while i still want to bop zoom into last week for fucking me out of my coveted and long-awaited spot in the hearing, after reading all the notes (thanks fam!!), i am very distinctly reminded of the glorious recording of russell’s ariana grande case provided by an amazing kiwi, where the judge gave russ an artful smackdown.
russell is at his most arrogant, condescending, and self-aggrandizing behind a screen. i believe all of the initial tard-guarding and his “woe is me” filings had long convinced him the judge is on his side. but having to converse “in person,” by phone or actually face-to-face, russell absolutely crumples. he can write whatever he pleases in a filing or an email that takes the other party time to respond to. but in real-time? russell absolutely falls apart. can’t wait for my opportunity to hear it. even the slightest questioning of his actions or statements, he becomes a verbally doddering mess.
russell is at his most arrogant, condescending, and self-aggrandizing behind a screen. i believe all of the initial tard-guarding and his “woe is me” filings had long convinced him the judge is on his side. but having to converse “in person,” by phone or actually face-to-face, russell absolutely crumples. he can write whatever he pleases in a filing or an email that takes the other party time to respond to. but in real-time? russell absolutely falls apart. can’t wait for my opportunity to hear it. even the slightest questioning of his actions or statements, he becomes a verbally doddering mess.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2019
Greedy Fly
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2024
Big thanks to everyone who posted summaries and impressions, such a deluge of milk is a nice thing to come home to after a long day at work.
Not even screenshots; now I'm imagining a grainy film photo of null typing at his computer, caught red handed in the act of posting.
Did he really say photographs?
Not even screenshots; now I'm imagining a grainy film photo of null typing at his computer, caught red handed in the act of posting.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2019
I’ve finally had a chance to read through the court happenings now that I have dealt with work-related matters (aka plights and hardships).
Good job to all observers for not behaving like niggers during the proceedings— at least for a few minutes. Rekeita-observer bros need to do better.
All-in-all funny shit and it seems like at least some things are going in the right direction.
Any bets on if shit lips produces a RO?
Good job to all observers for not behaving like niggers during the proceedings— at least for a few minutes. Rekeita-observer bros need to do better.
All-in-all funny shit and it seems like at least some things are going in the right direction.
Any bets on if shit lips produces a RO?
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
Interest on the sanction.
He could contest it the marking, but that seems silly given that the Judge ordered it.
Given he is not required to do so, and that the document doesn't exist - no. He is required to produce his application for RO.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2025
It was reasonable, thread was moving a page a minute.
Because Russ is a sneaky spitlips, I envision a future where he fails to indicate to the clerks that the filing is for attorney's eyes only. I recommend staff being extra vigilant.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2023
I'm seriously doubting he will do it.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2021
New poll?
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
I think the IFP one would be more interesting
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2021
there is a denial of the application on record, so there is an application on record.
edit: unless russell won’t supply the sealed application (thanks for the correction, @Useful_Mistake !) there is something on the application russell doesn’t want to be seen?
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2022
But stating that it's for the application for the RO and not the RO itself at the top of the page via poll may curb retardation, it's a genius ploy
