- Joined
- Aug 25, 2017
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ron and Monica get served notice through their counsel. And I'm pretty sure the judge can do whatever he wants, but I doubt that he'd grant a unilateral protective order just for Vic. But given that the defendants have strongly objected to the protective order, who knows.If BHBH wanted to force Monica and Ron to attend the 31 May hearing, they'd need to have served them notice by now wouldn't they?
Also, if the judge refused to grant a protective order, would that only be in respect of Ron and Monica or would that ruling apply to the depositions of the other defendants, too?
Ron and Monica get served notice through their counsel. And I'm pretty sure the judge can do whatever he wants, but I doubt that he'd grant a unilateral protective order just for Vic. But given that the defendants have strongly objected to the protective order, who knows.
If there is such an order it will probably be either for both sides or for neither.
If the defendants insist on opposing it they have nothing to complain about no matter what comes out in the future.
I should have worded that question better. If the judge denies the application for a protective order on 31st, does that mean that then mean that the other defendants will be stuck with that decision as well? It seems if Monica and Ron are effectively able to bind all of the parties - including the other defendants - to their wishes. Or is that issue something which would be revisited with each of the other defendants at the appropriate time?
Also, how much time does Casey have left in which to file a TCPA?
I don't think he really cares about these clients of his. He's probably doing the bare minimum given the kinds of people they are and likely driving him nuts.I'm starting to think that Casey Erick Esquire is not much of a Chess Player. Or a Poker Player?
I'm starting to think that Casey Erick Esquire is not much of a Chess Player. Or a Poker Player?
The deadline is 60 days after the date of service of the original complaint, however extensions can be granted. So for MoRon, the deadline is on or around June 18.Also, how much time does Casey have left in which to file a TCPA?
The fact that he didn't immediately file it speaks volumes for his or his clients' motivations.The deadline is 60 days after the date of service of the original complaint, however extensions can be granted. So for MoRon, the deadline is on or around June 18.
The fact that he didn't immediately file it speaks volumes for his or his clients' motivations.
But that's stating the obvious.
I'm more inclined to agree with the first of those two scenarios. Somebody with a strong case does not file a complete trash fire of a response.Well the delay of the TCPA is less about his clients motivations, and more his own motivations. I see one of two reasons for filing the TCPA later in the deadline:
One: Casey doesn't think he has a strong case and thinks the longer he can drag this out the better since that just gives more opportunity to find a smoking gun they so desperately need. Or-
Two: Casey thinks somehow this is a slam dunk (either MoRon have not been honest to him, or he actually does have that smoking gun) and he's delaying filing the TCPA he ends up making more money off the case. After all, filing and winning a TCPA doesn't just end the case, in the situation that a TCPA wins, they can potentially shoulder all legal costs on Vic, meaning MoRon/jamie/Funi would be out nothing. So he gets a bigger paycheck, and his clients are out nothing. Win/Win for everyone not Vic in this situation.
I'm more inclined to agree with the first of those two scenarios. Somebody with a strong case does not file a complete trash fire of a response.
Regardless of his strategy, he is absolutely dragging the suit out to get more of dem billable hours.
Oh I completely agree, but there's also the possibility that Casey is just as dumb as his clients and thinks he has it in the bag either because he's that arrogant for being a 'super lawyer' or because his clients potentially lying to him about evidence and are pulling the same "It's true, believe us, we'll bring it in soon, I promise" BS that they are on twitter.
Or could be a bit of Column A, bit of Column B, which seems the most plausible given both the clients and lawyer come off as fools.
Casey doesn't need to worry about his reputation
I doubt it'll put him out of (much) work. How many of us know our attorneys' entire case history? And anyways, I have no horse in the "let's ruin Casey Erick" race.Lol that's where he's wrong. Because his reputation is now that he's the guy who did this, forever.
Unless this case turns out legendary in how wrong a plaintiff could be and he becomes the hero, he's the lawyer who did this. Anyone who looks him up, forever, is going to see that he's the lawyer who did this.
Would you hire this guy, sight unseen, if you got bit by a dog?
I'd hope the other guy got this guy.
I doubt it'll put him out of (much) work. How many of us know our attorneys' entire case history? And anyways, I have no horse in the "let's ruin Casey Erick" race.
Similarly, I don't really care if we don't get all the juicy doxey details on Vic's anonymous accusers because of the TCPA. (Correct me if I'm wrong: the only stuff covered by that would be, like, incidental nobodies on the internet and the occasional blowjob story, right?) It seems like all the important info will come out one way or another. Even if it's justTyan anonymous source accidentally misfiling a few folders in Nick's mail slot.
I don't speak for KF, but I can take or leave whatever petty details we might miss out on just to see a guilty verdict. And I'm really hoping Ty doesn't let them off the hook after all these chickenshit gambits. (Buuut I also understand that's just how these things fizzle out, sometimes.)
Lol that's where he's wrong. Because his reputation is now that he's the guy who did this, forever.
Unless this case turns out legendary in how wrong a plaintiff could be and he becomes the hero, he's the lawyer who did this. Anyone who looks him up, forever, is going to see that he's the lawyer who did this.
Would you hire this guy, sight unseen, if you got bit by a dog?
I'd hope the other guy got this guy.