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

AnOminous said:
I'd go even further and say it's virtually certain both sides appeal, unless somehow Jamie Marchi is the only one to win her motion and nobody else wins in the slightest, unless that win is solely on the conspiracy count. The plaintiff generally can't appeal the partial grant of a TCPA. However, the defendant has an automatic right to an interlocutory appeal of a denial.

So one or more defendants are almost certain to appeal any denial. If the plaintiff has anything to appeal, though, the appeals court can permissively allow such an appeal. If there's already an appeal as of right before it from the defendant(s), I can't see any particularly good reason they wouldn't want to take it all in one batch.

Under those circumstances, the trial court is likely (but not required) to grant a stay on the remaining proceedings pending the appeal.

If that happens, we're looking at a year of relative quiet, although you can press X to Doubt that and we've seen things not go quiet when they should have before.



They can.

"Sec. 51.014. APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDER. (a) A person may appeal from an interlocutory order of a district court, county court at law, statutory probate court, or county court that:

[. . .]

(12) denies a motion to dismiss filed under Section 27.003[.]" Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 51.014(a)(12).

That's as of right. A person may also appeal from nearly anything else, but this is permissive and usually not granted. I think it would be likely granted for Vic, though, if the same court were already hearing a defense appeal of the same case. This is just an off the cuff guess.
Click to expand...
The reason any defendant would appeal is that they have money left to do so. Marchi is a good choice because she's wasted the least money. Same with Funi, who can actually afford to.
Ivan Shatov said:
The integrity of notary stamps is a big deal. Calling the affidavits defective doesn't address the problem with the stamp.

We don't know how they got there, all that is alleged is that the affiants were not there in person. There could be an explanation, such as Ty collected the signatures in person and registered them when he got back to his office. This would be bending the rules but not necessarily breaking them.

That said, I spoke with my CPA and a couple lawyers about notarized affidavits. They suggested lawyers on a time crunch have been known to bend the rules and get a stamp on a document without the affiant present in person. They told me some lawsuits have been thrown out because the judge got wind of this happening, and that some lawsuits have proceeded despite bogus stamps.

Without knowing all the facts, they couldn't give me more advice. I'm eager to learn how this plays out. The fact the affidavits are not included in the ultimate motion probably limits the damage.
Click to expand...
Ty's stamps got there because he put them there. There's just no two ways around that. Whether or not that actually matters is for the courts (or possibly the secretary of state/attorney general) to decide. Let's not get side-tracked by our exceptional thinking.

EDIT:
Tour of Italy said:
Jesus Christ just rename this thread the Notary Stamp Spedfight already.

The best part is people popping in to repeat arguments from dozens of pages before like they’re the real top autist.

I’m pretty sure the fucking Texas Notary Board doesn’t care as much about this shit as this thread does.
Click to expand...
I mean, we might as WELL. Remember: If you're not an antisocial edgelord, you're automatically a hugbox! No autism allowed in-between!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: instythot
Legioneer said:
It's not just that. One of the arguments they raise is that the new document of September 2 has the same signature. Literally the same, but without the "tor".
Click to expand...

With out getting too powerleveling, I've recently signed a contract in Texas where I chose a signature font, typed out my name, and clicked sign multiple times on the document and it put this digital signature onto there for me.

Not sure if it's an accepted Texas thing or if so, if it applies to court documents like this.

Also very disappointed if we don't have a Kiwi farms operative on the ground. What kind of stalking and harassment forum is this?
 
  • Informative
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: 774, The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, Subwoofa and 5 others
Polyboros2 said:
With out getting too powerleveling, I've recently signed a contract in Texas where I chose a signature font, typed out my name, and clicked sign multiple times on the document and it put this digital signature onto there for me.

Not sure if it's an accepted Texas thing or if so, if it applies to court documents like this.

Also very disappointed if we don't have a Kiwi farms operative on the ground. What kind of stalking and harassment forum is this?
Click to expand...
I'm just curious why people keep assuming it's a font. It doesn't even LOOK like one. Try harder, faggots.
 
will nick live tweet or will we have to wait until next week for the details? twitter is rate limited for me so no one's tweet page is showing for me.
 
Polyboros2 said:
With out getting too powerleveling, I've recently signed a contract in Texas where I chose a signature font, typed out my name, and clicked sign multiple times on the document and it put this digital signature onto there for me.

Not

Also very disappointed if we don't have a Kiwi farms operative on the ground. What kind of stalking and harassment forum is this?
Click to expand...
Polyboros2 said:
With out getting too powerleveling, I've recently signed a contract in Texas where I chose a signature font, typed out my name, and clicked sign multiple times on the document and it put this digital signature onto there for me.

Not sure if it's an accepted Texas thing or if so, if it applies to court documents like this.

Also very disappointed if we don't have a Kiwi farms operative on the ground. What kind of stalking and harassment forum is this?
Click to expand...
The Kiwi Prime Directive:
Don't get in the toilet; Don't pozload my neghole.

As invested as I am in this, I have to remind myself that this doesn't effect me at all.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: MightyBiteySnake, CuntBusterMan55, lemmiwinks and 1 other person
AStupidMonkey said:
I'm just curious why people keep assuming it's a font. It doesn't even LOOK like one. Try harder, faggots.
Click to expand...

It's about the added " tor" part (Vic tor).
Not about the whole signature. They say they compared it to the font and 100% matched it.

I'm not saying they're right, of course. But while there is no information about the court, I wonder if there is at least 0.01% chance that they will cling to something and at least with a specific judge it will work.

That is, Vic will be called to testify as to whether he signed the document on September 2 on the grounds that it is the same signature as August 30.

Here I no longer discuss their prospects with affidavits and notarization. Now i am only interested in the question of signature. I just don't know if they have any reason at all to demand an explanation with the help of a judge who could use his authority.
 
Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 10.00.53 AM.png


They have someone attending. Apparently it's crowded. And who the fuck is this fat fuck to talk?

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 10.02.02 AM.png
 
  • Horrifying
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: CuntBusterMan55, mindlessobserver, Immortal Technique and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back