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

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

  • This Month

    Votes: 67 14.4%
  • Next Month

    Votes: 56 12.0%
  • This Year

    Votes: 73 15.7%
  • Next Year

    Votes: 156 33.5%
  • Whenever he issues an update to the sanctions

    Votes: 113 24.3%

  • Total voters
    465

Isn't that meant to be a bonus?

Whore-Dash?

I think that's what they call it when a streetwalker runs from the police in high heels at speeds rarely seen outside the olympics.

How the HELL did the Russtard pass penis inspection day?

He used a fake one, a prosthetic, like in the movies before CG. Knowing Crusty Rusty, he bought the prop from boogie nights with the money he made while being a paralegal before losing that job for using restricted access legal databases to creep on women.
 
Last edited:
If this case gets transferred to Florida, they’re not bound by the Tenth Circuit holding that Russ stated a valid claim, are they? Or is it “law of the case”?
When the case moved to Florida the first time the consensus was that the decisions the 10th made could not be undone in Florida or at least that it would be nearly worthless to try.
 
There's a timeline in which "The Kiwi Farms" is the name of a Brothel in the southwest United States with the most confused owner ever.

"I have no idea what happened but it was sanctions and a settlement and for some reason the payment processors are canceling me LESS for this than for making fun of weird people online. Explain this to me chat, I just can't."
Why are the whores all morbidly obese deathfats?
 
Isn't that meant to be a bonus?

There's an ancient lyric stuck in my head and I've no idea where it's from.

"I will raise your pleasure centres,
Soon as I take out my dentures..."

Also Zappa: Baby Take Your Teeth Out.


How the HELL did the Russtard pass penis inspection day?

I remember reading about the penis inspection process in London's Soho in the immediate post WWII period. Condoms weren't obligatory at the time, so the whores would inspect the penis prior to washing it, and during the washing process, they'd manipulate it in such a way as to see if anything was discharged. It was a strategy aimed at preventing them from contracting venereal diseases.

It seems somewhat redundant today when everybody is supposed to wear a condom. Perhaps it's a historical tradition that's been handed down from mother to daughter?
 
It seems somewhat redundant today when everybody is supposed to wear a condom.
General off topic psa, but condoms won't keep you from getting crabs/pubic lice, and genital warts can also be on places not covered by rubber.
Plus I guess the pimp will beat anyone who takes the condom off during into a pulp, but that kind of post-exposure treatment might dissuade it happen in the future, but you might already be infected by then.
 
Plus I guess the pimp will beat anyone who takes the condom off during into a pulp
Nah, johns pay extra for no condom and cash is king. A girl with a disease can be dumped and there’s always someone new to fill her place (legal or not). You really think some John is gonna complain ‘to the management’ about getting an STD and not get a beating for it?

Just one of the reasons why the whole prostitution thing is a nightmare.
 
Threadly reminder that the only reason Russell isn't up shit creek right now is because his opponent is Null. If Russell had sued anyone else, he would've been bankrupted long ago.
He wouldn't've - it would have been dismissed immediately and NOT revived on appeal.
 
He wouldn't've - it would have been dismissed immediately and NOT revived on appeal.
Interestingly, this is actually the greatest chance of actually bankrupting Greer, as this is the first time that he had enough time in a lawsuit to fuck around with discovery in blatantly malicious ways and get hit with multiple sanctions. Of course that all depends on what Sir Barlow Protector of Vexatious Tards intends to do when Greer files his reconsideration motions after the next round of sanctions. At least his last excuses (he's IFP and this is the first sanction) aren't available anymore.
 
Greer is a cockroach that has a shitty job and barely enough to pay rent (when he isn't evicted for not paying), yet still manages to save up 5 figures for hookers.
You can't bankrupt him. He'll find a way to not pay, his life revolves around not paying for anything so that he can get a hooker to fall in love with him.
The only reason he continues this lawsuit is because he thinks his thread is the only thing that keeps him from love, but the second it's too costly he'll just ignore it. (In his book he conflates love with sex, he's very desperate for someone to love him)
 
Of course that all depends on what Sir Barlow Protector of Vexatious Tards intends to do when Greer files his reconsideration motions after the next round of sanctions. At least his last excuses (he's IFP and this is the first sanction) aren't available anymore.
I'm very curious to see what the District judge's next ruling looks like. The Magistrate is the one who's been in the middle of Greer's shitty antics, while the District judge has rarely been roped in. Other than referring things to the Magistrate, Barlow has only made 3 rulings so far:

July 3, 2024 - Overruling Defense objections to Magistrate granting Greer's extension of time to reply to motions (after the deadline had passed, the suit had been bounced to and back from Florida, and then granted more time 7 months late) (link)​
Feb 12, 2025 - jumping down into the proceedings and declaring Greer's first sanction should only be $1000 (link)​
May 21, 2025 - denying Greer's motion for bonded stay on those sanctions (but still giving him extra time to pay it) (link)​

It's not a lot to read into, the overall sense is one of tard-guarding. I think it does set the stage for the Magistrate's "death march to trial" I keep accusing him of, because each ruling is trying to keep the case from getting tossed, either from unanswered motions or unpaid money.

However the last two times Barlow had to look at the docket, it was Greer being caught in a "must" sanction, and then trying to get out of it. Maybe the tard shield is lowering now. I don't want to get too 🌈 here, but while dismissing Greer's bonded stay motion for using the wrong rule, Barlow keeps going and notes that Greer is willfully being a piece of shit, that the sanction was needed:

1748273487783.webp

That's the correct read on what Greer did, so kudos to Barlow for seeing it in all the mess of filings.

Now the question is, when Hardin's multiple reasons for dismissing the case get to Barlow, will he revert to the death march, or continue to take this view of Greer's excuses? In his first ruling a year ago, Barlow admitted Hardin's arguments were technically correct, but found a way around granting them by giving Greer huge benefit of the doubt. After a year of retarded antics that can not be given the benefit of the doubt (Steve was FUCKING DEAD), maybe he'll think twice about trying to keep this case alive.

I'm hopeful that the IFP fraud will particularly annoy him. It's the clearest thing on the record that Russ is willfully lying to the court when it suits him, with no pro se confusion or neglect possible.
 
At what point would it be prudent to file a writ of mandamus against Judge Barlow? Does he need to do something especially egregious or does he just need to show a consistent pattern of behavior of decisions filed in favor of one side? Or does the writ just compel Judge Barlow to dismiss the case for failure to act on prejudicial material?
 
After a year of retarded antics that can not be given the benefit of the doubt (Steve was FUCKING DEAD), maybe he'll think twice about trying to keep this case alive.

I've got a strong suspicion that the thing that'll really shift Barlow's attitude in respect of Russell are his attacks on Hardin for simply doing his job.

It's my understanding -- here in the UK at least -- that judges really don't like pro se litigants. They shit up their docket and make everything take four times as long as it should in a court system that's overburdened with proper cases where people have real lawyers. So they do what the law demands of them, but -- here in the UK at least -- they tend not to be bending over backwards to help them out. I'm convinced Greer has had an easier ride than he would have normally had because of Kiwifarms' reputation.

But as much as they might not like Kiwifarms/Josh, I'm pretty sure that they'll see Matthew Hardin as 'one of us'. A young lawyer doing his best to mount a robust defence on behalf of his client. And this mealy mouthed cunt keeps stepping up and making all manner of scurrilous allegations about him, none of which have any basis in fact. They've already fucked young Matthew by reducing his sanctions award, but there's a point at which they have to draw a line and say, 'OK, his client might be a bit of an asshole, but he's nowhere near as big an asshole as the plaintiff in this case.'

Sure, I'm probably being optimistic here, but I genuinely AM optimistic that we're about to see the tide start to turn now.
 
At what point would it be prudent to file a writ of mandamus against Judge Barlow? Does he need to do something especially egregious or does he just need to show a consistent pattern of behavior of decisions filed in favor of one side? Or does the writ just compel Judge Barlow to dismiss the case for failure to act on prejudicial material?
Chill Acerthorn, it's rarely a good idea.
 
Chill Acerthorn, it's rarely a good idea.
Normally, yes, but if he rules against Greer falsifying his IFP status then that forms a consistent flaunting of court rules. First it was denying Hardin a chance to respond to the insane 1k sanctions decision, and it may be that he ignores a “must” clause to ignore Greer’s misconduct. At that point, he’s violated 2 court rules and has consistently ruled in one direction for various “may” clauses. That sounds to me like a pattern of behavior that’s prejudicial to the defense.
 
Normally, yes, but if he rules against Greer falsifying his IFP status then that forms a consistent flaunting of court rules. First it was denying Hardin a chance to respond to the insane 1k sanctions decision, and it may be that he ignores a “must” clause to ignore Greer’s misconduct. At that point, he’s violated 2 court rules and has consistently ruled in one direction for various “may” clauses. That sounds to me like a pattern of behavior that’s prejudicial to the defense.
This case, nonsensical as it is, is starting to look favorable after a very long time of protracted bullshit. Antagonizing the district judge now with a move that has almost zero chance of working would be levels of retardation to rival the great Stebbins himself.
 
Back