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

[Billy Bong]

Russel's filings are magnificent, each one better than the last. No shame in the game baby.

 

[budgetcandle]

All that shit he did.. just to be cucked by the law again.

 

[HackerX]

He doesn't see what he did there, does he?

Magnificent. He's somehow being honest and lying at the same time. I'm sure Harden or a judge won't pick that apart or anything like that.

 

[AnOminous]

I don't think so.

It might, but the issue is moot since the Tenth Circuit considers anti-SLAPP statutes procedural and not substantive. I'm also not sure it would apply at all if the core basis for jurisdiction is copyright, since that's a federal question. In fact, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't.

While Russ continues plightsperging instead of pursuing the copyright claim, the only active claim is copyright and he hasn't introduced anything new other than more copyright as well as questionable state law civil conspiracy claims against two unknown defendants unlikely ever to be served.

I suppose it's possible those claims could be covered depending on where those defendants are, but since it's up to Russ to establish where they are, I don't think they're really in play. It's filed well outside of the two year statute of limitations anyway, though, so again probably another moot issue.

 

[moorhen]

He doesn't see what he did there, does he?

firstly, no, he’s retarded.
Secondly, the only reason he wants to open a brothel is to get he his dick wet, so really, it kind of is personal business.
If he ever actually achieved this (he won’t, because he’s retarded) he’d get possessive and weird about the whores, because those are his whores, and wouldn’t let them work, and probably ban every man who steps foot into Winnemucca from his brothel for perceived slights against him.

Lastly, I love Rusty. I love everything he files. I love how stupid he is. I dislike that Null has to keep going round in circles with this absolute specimen, but the chuckles I get whenever he files something bring me joy. It’s like watching him swerve into oncoming traffic in slow motion. Somehow he keeps dodging cars with a few little bumps, but there’s a semi coming that’s going to rearrange his gourd face.

 

[Jacknife]

I AM NOT ASHAMED! NOW STOP BRINGING IT UP!

View attachment 7384145
View attachment 7384153

I really do desperately hope that Hardin has been notified of the brand-new LLC that was registered last week and the accompanying questions it raises about Greer's continued insistence that he shouldn't have to pay anyone anything at any time. I was really hoping to see a new filing from him today in that regard.

I'd assume he would wait until Greer either lapsed on his sanction and/or court fee payment, or maybe casually omitts the LLC in one of his filings

 

[The Man With No Name]

You know, I'm no legal expert, but it seems like from about 2 minutes of Googling I found that in a civil suit, a Plaintiff doesn't get to request the court issue a Show Cause Order on a Defendant.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like Russ is just copying from others' playbooks and doesn't understand, once again, he is the plaintiff litigating the case and the defendant is there to stop him.

 

[DavidS877]

I'd assume he would wait until Greer either lapsed on his sanction and/or court fee payment, or maybe casually omitts the LLC in one of his filings

Or if he whines again about the cost of the Utah documents.

 

[3-2-1836]

For the dim witted and Russ. Hardin is only digging into the Winnemucca stuff because you gave him cause to. You committed fraud upon the court that would have been prejudicial to the defendant.

Which makes it even more hilarious is he did all this for to try to convince a city re-zone a property that state law prohibits from ever being made into a brothel.

 

[Harvey Danger]

He's learned! He's changed! He's gone to therapy. It's all in the past. Nevermind that He's trying to steal a 100 year old family run family friendly hotel via government fraud in order to turn it into a Whorehouse so he can get him his penis sucked everyday, just last week. He's changed! Why bring up the past?

It's weird how the innocent, disabled, safety advocate has multiple orders and judgements against him, across multiple courts and states. But the guy supposedly running a STALKING AND HARASSMENT WEBSITE is squeaky clean, legally speaking. All this digging into the past makes the "safety advocate" look sketchier, and the "harassment site" look more legal.

Funny how that works.

 

[DavidS877]

You know, I'm no legal expert, but it seems like from about 2 minutes of Googling I found that in a civil suit, a Plaintiff doesn't get to request the court issue a Show Cause Order on a Defendant.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like Russ is just copying from others' playbooks and doesn't understand, once again, he is the plaintiff litigating the case and the defendant is there to stop him.

I don't even think:

Plaintiff makes a motion for Defendants to show cause for why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for an FRCP 11(b)(1) violation, as they are clearly using litigation to harass and embarrass plaintiff.

Is even a valid show cause reason. Just email the proposed sanction to the defendant, wait the 21 days, file the sanction, THEN they can dispute it.

 

[AnOminous]

You know, I'm no legal expert, but it seems like from about 2 minutes of Googling I found that in a civil suit, a Plaintiff doesn't get to request the court issue a Show Cause Order on a Defendant.

You can but there are requirements Russ hasn't complied with at all. I can't really go into them because we don't want the thread to be Retard Pro Se Nursery School.

 

[ScooterL]

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like Russ is just copying from others' playbooks and doesn't understand, once again, he is the plaintiff litigating the case and the defendant is there to stop him.

Cargo-cult law. The words "show cause" had a devastating effect on him, so they've now entered his lexicon of legal incantations he thinks he can use to damage others just by typing them on his iphone.

 

[ConSluttant]

I'm assuming he meant "unbecoming", but I can't ignore the freudian slip!

Is there a threshold where a litigant, even an IFP pro se, can get admonished for constant typos and shit formatting? Or where it plays some sort of factor to consider? I assume there is a very high bar to get to that point, but it's an obvious indicator for the lack of time and effort that person is spending on their filings.

The court isn't going to bother. Some courts, however will reject your entire filing if you don't use the right font, format, or page type - specifically the Supreme Court. It's all in the local rules how nit-picky they are with these things. It irritates us, it irritates the judge's clerk, probably irritates the judge. Unless it's completely uninteligible consistently, they're not gonna do anything. But it gives opposing counsel a snarky way to poke you with a stick because they get to use (sic) when quoting you in their reply filings. And to someone like Russ, that is UTTERLY INTOLERABLE, so that makes it worth the mental screaming we all go through seeing his crap.

View attachment 7384336

He doesn't see what he did there, does he?

Yeah, personal affairs can't be found through public information requests. That would be PUBLIC affairs, Russ, you mong. YOU emailed a governmental entity. YOU did something public. Your fault it got exposed because you decided to lie to the court about what happened. YOU requested the very day the hearing was on to be the one you wanted to present to the council on. That's on you and only you. Too bad you got found out, eh?

You know, I'm no legal expert, but it seems like from about 2 minutes of Googling I found that in a civil suit, a Plaintiff doesn't get to request the court issue a Show Cause Order on a Defendant.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like Russ is just copying from others' playbooks and doesn't understand, once again, he is the plaintiff litigating the case and the defendant is there to stop him.

Well, show causes aren't exactly requested by parties. At least not in this manner. Russ is going about it wrong, of course. Could he do it any other way? I think not. lol

 

[Dizzyuntildeath]

View attachment 7384336

He doesn't see what he did there, does he?


After this filing, I wish to retract the above comment.

And just like that you're better than him.

 

[Thomas Talus]

Well, show causes aren't exactly requested by parties. At least not in this manner.

Depends on the type of case. If I'm representing an estate, and need to kick the decedent's deadbeat kid off of the property in order to sell it, I'd file a motion for an order to show cause why they should not be removed from the property.

 

[ScooterL]

they get to use (sic) when quoting you in their reply filings. And to someone like Russ, that is UTTERLY INTOLERABLE

Bold to assume he knows what (sic) means.

 

[Billy Bong]

Will Hardin respond to these magnificent filings?

 

[Accept Only Substitutes]

Bold to assume he knows what (sic) means.

He thinks it's a reference to his dishaboolty.

 

[AnOminous]

Well, show causes aren't exactly requested by parties. At least not in this manner. Russ is going about it wrong, of course. Could he do it any other way? I think not. lol

Generally, anything a court can do of its own volition can be requested by motion as well. There are motions that by their very nature can trigger an OSC whether the party explicitly requests it or not, but a party can also explicitly request one.

A common OSC you'll see a court issue on its own is for contempt, whether for direct contempt (committed in the court and witnessed by the judge) or indirect (flouting a court order).