Victor Mignogna v. Funimation Productions, LLC, et al. (2019) - Vic's lawsuit against Funimation, VAs, and others, for over a million dollars.

Imperial Agent said:
This is more than a Hail Mary. Accusations like this are very serious, and the fact that several attorneys all were willing to co-sign it should give you pause. If it doesn’t you’ve drank the kool-aid.
Click to expand...

This is why I'm taking it seriously. Whoever is right about this, someone has done something seriously wrong and probably seriously illegal. If Ty did what they're saying, that's very serious. If, however, a bunch of lawyers signed on to an incredibly grave allegation like this with no evidence at all and are wrong, that's probably sanctionable at the very least.

You're supposed to verify factual allegations you make as a basis for a motion. That's a professional conduct rule. They often let it slide when it's dishonest client claims because almost universally, one of the parties, or a criminal defendant, is lying their asses off. However, this particular accusation comes directly from counsel in the case. They are staking their reputations and maybe their licenses on it.

That should be taken very seriously.

Maybe it's a no harm no foul thing and it wouldn't be the first time there was much ado about nothing in a court case but at the moment there are very serious allegations on the table but the only evidence in sight is laughable.

KingofNothing said:
He either goofed or he didn't
Click to expand...

SOMEONE is going in the penalty box for this. I'm not sure who. I certainly hope it's the other guy(s).
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Yuusha-sama, NotaLolyer, not william stenchever and 32 others
AnOminous said:
SOMEONE is going in the penalty box for this. I'm not sure who. I certainly hope it's the other guy(s).
Click to expand...
I agree. I have been a rather neutral party in all of this notary talk, but I have to ask, what would happen if the book itself is inaccurate regardless of the reason? It could be a simple matter of it being on the 29th at 23:58 and the clock struck midnight on the 30th when the wax seal is applied for example.
 
pearlslam said:
I agree. I have been a rather neutral party in all of this notary talk, but I have to ask, what would happen if the book itself is inaccurate regardless of the reason? It could be a simple matter of it being on the 29th at 23:58 and the clock struck midnight on the 30th when the wax seal is applied for example.
Click to expand...
The notary's job is literally to be right about this shit

Regardless, we're not talking about some OOPSIE DOODLE TWO MINUTES OFF, either they were there when he stamped or there weren't.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: not william stenchever, AnOminous and Imperial Agent
AnOminous said:
Maybe it's a no harm no foul thing and it wouldn't be the first time there was much ado about nothing in a court case but at the moment there are very serious allegations on the table but the only evidence in sight is laughable.
Click to expand...

I have a MAPQUEST showing distance and routes! It is hard evidence backed up by good links. I also have tweets that don't show location or timestamps of the picture itself. Please give me money and credibility your honor. - Lemoine "the Furher"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kosher Salt, 774, AStupidMonkey and 1 other person
Sheryl Nome said:
The notary's job is literally to be right about this shit

Regardless, we're not talking about some OOPSIE DOODLE TWO MINUTES OFF, either they were there when he stamped or there weren't.
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing that. I witnessed a notary work before. It takes a little bit of time between one signature and another.

Overall, this is the eleventh-hour bullshit that Ty has to answer for. There are no excuses.
 
Meanwhile, T. Greg dropped that Judge Chupp already denied one of plaintiffs motions.
I don't know if it's true or not.

EDk-ew4X4AAJhtq
 
The Singer Of Songs said:
Let's play this out a bit: Why would Ty, someone who has 20 years of full-on experience and has done affidavits and notarizing for eons, jeopardize a pretty solid case on a technical issue? IF you are certain in your work, you're not going to commit fraud in order to get ahead.

I find that a lot of what the other side spergs over seems so insignificant and small, and easily rectifiable. It makes me think that there is a very simple fix that has been put into place, and that once trial comes along, that the other side is going to end up getting sodomized with a law book.

If that makes me exceptional or optimistic, I'm ready for the label.
Click to expand...
This is the "I'm too clever to be commit a stupid crime therefore I didn't commit a stupid crime" defence. It's not really all that persuasive because sometimes smart people do really stupid things.

Like file a response with blank spaces in their footnotes.

Added:
I forgot to say that he doesn't have to do this to "get ahead", he could've done it out of laziness because why would it really matter if they weren't actually there if they swore to it over the phone. I don't know how he could benefit from falsifying the affidavits in any material way, but if he's lazy (again, blank spaces in the footnotes) that would really explain his behaviour.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Dumb
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Coach Kreeton Of All That, not william stenchever, 774 and 3 others
10SorrowfulObject said:
This is the "I'm too clever to be commit a stupid crime therefore I didn't commit a stupid crime" defence. It's not really all that persuasive because sometimes smart people do really stupid things.

Like file a response with blank spaces in their footnotes.
Click to expand...
The good news is the response doesn't really matter.
 
BlehFail.451 said:
I take it this is due to not including a checklist or whatever?
Click to expand...
Probably not just because of that; it's more likely that this is a ruling on the merits of the motion to strike.
Sheryl Nome said:
The good news is the response doesn't really matter.
Click to expand...
I don't think the response adversely affected Vic's chances, but that's because I felt he had very little chance to begin with. But the point is more that leaving blanks in your footnotes is lazy. Faking the notarization when they weren't actually present in person even though they agreed to it over email/phone/whatever (which is my guess at what happened) is similarly lazy.
 
10SorrowfulObject said:
Probably not just because of that; it's more likely that this is a ruling on the merits of the motion to strike.

I don't think the response adversely affected Vic's chances, but that's because I felt he had very little chance to begin with. But the point is more that leaving blanks in your footnotes is lazy. Faking the notarization when they weren't actually present in person even though they agreed to it over email/phone/whatever (which is my guess at what happened) is similarly lazy.
Click to expand...
Different categories imo. Fraudulently representing you properly notarized something you didn’t is far beyond “lazy”.

Particularly when the (proper) alternative was to not notarize at all.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: General Relativity QM and BlehFail.451
I'm sort of biased towards Ty, I like him and he's been doing well throughout in terms of filings/hearings plus he seems like a genuinely nice guy.
However, this notary thing is a fuck up (as far as my understanding goes) the question is how severe a fuck up judge Chupp will see it and until he rules on it on Friday pretty much any argument is kinda pointless. The people screaming fraud kind of annoy me, yes it could be perceived as such but it could also be perceived as a genuine mistake, at this point both statements are pretty much equally valid and could probably be argued over until the moon falls out of the fucking sky and we'd never get it cracked. At this point we gotta refer to the judge, he's gonna have the final say and that's gonna dictate how this case proceeds, stating the obvious, I know but that's the rub.
Saying that, i suppose i can still offer an opinion so here's my pointless take.
Judge Chupp is a straight shooter with little tolerance for bullshit, we've already seen that in previous hearings and it seems he's by the book so i think he'll give Ty some shit over this, he doesn't seem the type to let it just slide if there's even a chance of impropriety so yeah he'll give Ty a talking to, but as for some sort of major punishment in terms of Ty's practice or business no i don't see it, Chupp doesn't look like a fire and brimstone kind of bloke so I don't think he'll hit Ty too hard in that respect. As for the case, hmmmm, it might give Ty some headaches (in fact I'm sure it already is) but i also don't think it'll be fatal, mostly for the same reason that and the fact Ty has done what he can to correct his fuck up.
Anyway that's my thoughts beyond that I really don't wanna push my luck lol.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: General Relativity QM and (deleted member)
Imperial Agent said:
Different categories imo. Fraudulently representing you properly notarized something you didn’t is far beyond “lazy”.

Particularly when the (proper) alternative was to not notarize at all.
Click to expand...
Legally yes there's a big difference, but I'm arguing that the underlying driver is laziness. He should know better, but yet here we are.
 
  • Disagree
  • Dumb
Reactions: Coach Kreeton Of All That, Reverend and Imperial Agent
10SorrowfulObject said:
This is the "I'm too clever to be commit a stupid crime therefore I didn't commit a stupid crime" defence. It's not really all that persuasive because sometimes smart people do really stupid things.

Like file a response with blank spaces in their footnotes.

Added:
I forgot to say that he doesn't have to do this to "get ahead", he could've done it out of laziness because why would it really matter if they weren't actually there if they swore to it over the phone. I don't know how he could benefit from falsifying the affidavits in any material way, but if he's lazy (again, blank spaces in the footnotes) that would really explain his behaviour.
Click to expand...

I think the blank spaces were a result from compressing the PDF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back