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: 66 13.9%
  • Next Month

    Votes: 56 11.8%
  • This Year

    Votes: 74 15.5%
  • Next Year

    Votes: 164 34.5%
  • Whenever he issues an update to the sanctions

    Votes: 116 24.4%

  • Total voters
    476
And what good reason is there to keep Null - the subject of the application - from knowing it's contents?
probably because he doesnt have access to it now, as it was denied, only russ can see it. as its from a completely different court, judge bennett probably doesnt want to stir up those waters just because of russholes retarded bullshit so hes playing along with the request for it to remain confidential. is my guess.
 
Read the SPO.
Requiring viewers to do more work than Greer is unconstitutional!

My non-lawyer reading of the SPO is that it never bars from disclosure to the defendant; only to other defendants in a multi-defendant case, but I'm probably a retard, especially as Hardin took it differently.
 
As seen from Hardin’s reply to the extortion email, even if it is marked for attorney’s eyes only, Hardin can challenge that designation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: koos koets
As seen from Hardin’s reply to the extortion email, even if it is marked for attorney’s eyes only, Hardin can challenge that designation.
Yeah that's clear - I'm just trying to imagine what an actual ATTORNEY'S EYES ONLY communication would be useful for - and the only thing I can think of is a bench trial, or incidental bullshit during discovery (e.g., stuff eventually deemed/agreed to be irrelevant).

It's clear to me that TRUMP could order it all published.
 
The whole $67 could just be another outright lie from Russ- he doesn't want to comply with getting this document, so he intentionally miscalculated how much it will cost so he can bitch about it to the judge to try to wiggle out of it.
Even if Russ was still a qualified broke boy, he wouldn't be able to avoid it on the basis of cost. That only gets you out of filling fees. A reasonable person should expect to incur some costs during a lolsuit that they pulled the trigger on, particularly if they are short-sighted enough to dispose of the very evidence they seek to rely on.
  • He himself said it was relevant
  • He himself said it exists
  • He himself said he would be happy to provide it
  • He himself waived his right to argue relevance when he ignored the first request for production
  • He himself agreed to shoulder litigation costs minus filling fees when he brought the lolsuit
His solution to pissing the Magistrate off with recalcitrance is yet further recalcitrance. I want a response from the Magistrate NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW!
 
Yeah that's clear - I'm just trying to imagine what an actual ATTORNEY'S EYES ONLY communication would be useful for - and the only thing I can think of is a bench trial, or incidental bullshit during discovery (e.g., stuff eventually deemed/agreed to be irrelevant).

It's clear to me that TRUMP could order it all published.
It's often used in cases related to trade secrets, oftentimes parties do not want their proprietary data out in public.
 
Even if Russ was still a qualified broke boy, he wouldn't be able to avoid it on the basis of cost. That only gets you out of filling fees. A reasonable person should expect to incur some costs during a lolsuit that they pulled the trigger on, particularly if they are short-sighted enough to dispose of the very evidence they seek to rely on.
  • He himself said it was relevant
  • He himself said it exists
  • He himself said he would be happy to provide it
  • He himself waived his right to argue relevance when he ignored the first request for production
  • He himself agreed to shoulder litigation costs minus filling fees when he brought the lolsuit
His solution to pissing the Magistrate off with recalcitrance is yet further recalcitrance. I want a response from the Magistrate NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW!
dont forget this is a document he himself created and filed and he himself later chose to delete it. its his own fault that its no longer in his possession and he now has to ask the court to get a copy. even if there was any legal basis for his demand that his opponent pay the costs (which there isnt), im sure the combination of all these factors would be enough for a judge to order russhole to pay for it himself anyway, lol.
 
HOLY FUCK THE SEQUEL TO Why I Sued Taylor Swift: and How I Became Falsely Known as Frivolous, Litigious and Crazy IS GOING TO DROP THIS WEEK on google drive

As an aside, for attorney's eyes only - does that normally literally mean for the lawyers only, and the subjects/people being sued can't see it? What could that even normally be? Or is it for like "in discovery we submit the secret recipe for KFC, the attorney can look at it but nobody else; if part of it seems pertinent the attorney can petition for just that part to be made available, or in a bench trial the judge can see?"
When “attorney’s eyes only” is supposed to be invoked is different in every case.

Generally, this comes up in digital forensics matters where a plaintiff may request to find each and every mention of a certain word or phrase. That can generate thousands if not tens of thousands of records, most of which could be irrelevant to the case.

The attorneys are supposed to review those documents for relevance and only those considered relevant are to make it into the record and neither the plaintiff nor defendant are supposed to see most of it.

In this case, with the vexatious and frankly wholly dishonest nature of the plaintiff, it would seem to be totally reasonable that the defendant would be able to obtain documentation illustrating that the plaintiff had attempted to take action against him ostensibly for cause and actually see what sort of “cause” that was. It could potentially speak to the credibility - or, in this case, lack thereof - of the plaintiff.
 
I believe "Case ENDING Sanctions" are on the table for failure to produce the document. And for failure to produce the Dead Guy. And for failure to produce the $1000. And for failure to produce anything resembling a coherent written filing, motion or idea.
We have the lying about IFP, lying about Steve Taylor, and now failing to do what a judge has specifically told him to do. That makes 3 reasons that could easily result in case ending sanctions (dismissal) by themselves.
I wish I had your unbridled optimism and hope for the future.
 
The whole $67 could just be another outright lie from Russ- he doesn't want to comply with getting this document, so he intentionally miscalculated how much it will cost so he can bitch about it to the judge to try to wiggle out of it.
Does it even matter if it's $67 or $670 considering the tard already admitted that the $5300 would "almost" wipe out his whore fund? That means he should have about $6000 of disposable funds, regardless of his utterly retarded "it's for business so you can't force me to spend any of it" claims.
 
Does it even matter if it's $67 or $670 considering the tard already admitted that the $5300 would "almost" wipe out his whore fund? That means he should have about $6000 of disposable funds, regardless of his utterly retarded "it's for business so you can't force me to spend any of it" claims.
I think its more like $10000, he uses that number a lot when he's trying to buy whore shacks. 10k down on a 100k price tag with the gap filled by "investors"
 
Even at $14/hour it wouldn't take long to replace the $67 in his savings account. If he's careful about his spending, maybe a month.

He's not at the stage in his "business" where he's ready to spend his savings. Even if he somehow managed to find a property and have an offer accepted *today* he wouldn't have to put down money right away. Buying property takes a lot longer than he seems to think, it's not like a car where it takes several hours. I don't even think if you were paying for the property fully in cash the transaction would take any less than a couple of months, unless you don't do any inspections or get insurance.

This is in no way a hardship.
 
Even at $14/hour it wouldn't take long to replace the $67 in his savings account. If he's careful about his spending, maybe a month.

He's not at the stage in his "business" where he's ready to spend his savings. Even if he somehow managed to find a property and have an offer accepted *today* he wouldn't have to put down money right away. Buying property takes a lot longer than he seems to think, it's not like a car where it takes several hours. I don't even think if you were paying for the property fully in cash the transaction would take any less than a couple of months, unless you don't do any inspections or get insurance.

This is in no way a hardship.
buying property takes an hour or two to sign contracts. the inspections and insurance come into play when you're opening a business. so buying property is even less of a hardship than what you think .
 
buying property takes an hour or two to sign contracts. the inspections and insurance come into play when you're opening a business. so buying property is even less of a hardship than what you think .
I'm not talking about the signing of documents, I mean the stuff that happens before you get to that stage. Unless buying a business property is different from a house. It was several months between the day we applied for a mortgage and signed the papers and we walked into the bank with an accepted offer in hand.
 
I'm not talking about the signing of documents, I mean the stuff that happens before you get to that stage. Unless buying a business property is different from a house. It was several months between the day we applied for a mortgage and signed the papers and we walked into the bank with an accepted offer in hand.
you don't need to do inspections or anything else to buy property whether it's a house or an empty lot. that's up to the buyer and russ is looking for motels currently in operation because he thinks buying a motel to make into a brothel is a turnkey transition.

e: well, your bank may require you do to inspections and surveys but cash in hand can skip all that.
 
The attorneys are supposed to review those documents for relevance and only those considered relevant are to make it into the record and neither the plaintiff nor defendant are supposed to see most of it.
That's my assumption, discovery basically lets the attorneys see "under the petticoats" but only the facts that are relevant and necessary (and contested even, perhaps) need to actually get into evidence.

So greer is "somewhat right" if the 2018 document actually is irrelevant then Hardin can look at it, see it is bullshit, and then ask the judge and greer to admit it is bullshit, and it gets stricken from the record.

But if Hardin sees something that he believes is pertinent, he can get it marked as "to be entered into ebidance" even if it doesn't immediately get put publicly on the docket.

(This is why many people settle before trial because its a way to avoid things being public even if they're pertinent - both sides end up not wanting their dirty laundry aired.)
you don't need to do inspections or anything else to buy property whether it's a house or an empty lot. that's up to the buyer and russ is looking for motels currently in operation because he thinks buying a motel to make into a brothel is a turnkey transition.

e: well, your bank may require you do to inspections and surveys but cash in hand can skip all that.
lots of stuff "required" for real estate transactions are custom, to protect one side or the other, or because the banks don't want to be taken for a ride and fucked over (I could "sell" you a plot of shit land for $1m, you get a loan for $800k, we split it and flee to cuba)

there's usually nothing preventing a landowner from selling their real estate to someone else on a napkin for whatever consideration they want, even verbal real estate contracts can be enforced (but can also be an absolute fuck) - this is why title searches are important and fun!
 
Back