T
TS 298
Guest
kiwifarms.net
TCPA Hearing 9/6/19 - Marchi ran from the Law, TI crumbles, conspiracy still on the table, and collective autism from all sides.
- Thread starter Pope of Degeneracy
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Joined
- May 19, 2019
Jamie Marchi, the DSP of anime.
Garm
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2019
Yes. Kind of an asshole who needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to do his job.
- Joined
- May 17, 2019
I'd say DSP has more of a value to the world than that fat whore. DSP's exceptionalism for a time made villains greater than himself. Jamie is just a psychotic feminazi who voices thots
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2019
No one is paying attention to this other than weebs. This whole kickvic movement has a delusion of grandeur. And even Vic fans will not care about him in a year because it will be old news and he will not be voicing any character of note. None of this matters in any grand scheme.
DinkyCowSow
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
Short time reader, first time writer.
If you are picking sides and siding with the plaintiffs, you are going to get emotionally invested and then hurt (further) by this case.
One thing the TCPA does is make is so, if you want to sue somebody, you need to have some real evidence that they have committed a tort (a civil wrong, like defamation or tortious interference). This prevents rich turdburglars from just immediately suing anyone for anything, and then forcing them to spend lots and lots of time and money dealing with discovery. The plaintiff doesn't have to prove everything, but they need to be able to at least list off supporting evidence for each issue of a claim. That evidence also has to be "clear and specific". If you have anything that even approaches a reasonable case, you can get past a TCPA easily. The way it works is that the defendant says, "You are just suing me over my freeze peach", and then the plaintiff has to come back and say, "Actually, here's the tort they did, and here's some evidence the judge is forced to believe me about".
This is where Ty messed up. His response to the TCPA, if he had a real case, should have just been a list of each tort Vic accused the defendants of and a list of evidence that supports those. Let's pick one tort they Vic accused the defendants: Tortious Interference. These are the elements of TI in Texas (source):
1) an existing contract subject to interference
2) a willful and intentional act of interference with the contract
3) that proximately caused the plaintiff's injury
4) caused actual damages or loss.
(technically you must also prove the "tort" part, but that's really just about bypassing an affirmative defense)
Ty's response to the TCPA motion should have at least included, for each defendant, a list of facts that, if taken at face value (that's the prima facie part, which means the judge just has to believe you are telling the truth). And, he shouldn't need discovery for this. If they have a real case, event without a physical contract, then Vic should have been able to state "I had an agreement to go to this convention and get paid X dollars [that satisfies 1 and 4]. That convention cancelled on me, and said it was because defendant did tort Y to get that contract broken [satisfying 2 and 3]."
According to the papers that have been filed so far, Ty didn't put forward clear and specific evidence of any of these claims. The closest thing that Ty came to meeting was 1 and maybe 4, and that's because Vic claimed there were some contracts that were cancelled, but there was never clear and specific evidence that they were cancelled because of the defendants. Even worse, defendants can argue that 1 and 4 were not argued clear and specifically, because in Vic's own deposition he admits he can't think of any contracts that have been cancelled because of this.
Anyways legal nerdery ends here. I look forward to posting again after any appeals (if they still happen).
If you are picking sides and siding with the plaintiffs, you are going to get emotionally invested and then hurt (further) by this case.
One thing the TCPA does is make is so, if you want to sue somebody, you need to have some real evidence that they have committed a tort (a civil wrong, like defamation or tortious interference). This prevents rich turdburglars from just immediately suing anyone for anything, and then forcing them to spend lots and lots of time and money dealing with discovery. The plaintiff doesn't have to prove everything, but they need to be able to at least list off supporting evidence for each issue of a claim. That evidence also has to be "clear and specific". If you have anything that even approaches a reasonable case, you can get past a TCPA easily. The way it works is that the defendant says, "You are just suing me over my freeze peach", and then the plaintiff has to come back and say, "Actually, here's the tort they did, and here's some evidence the judge is forced to believe me about".
This is where Ty messed up. His response to the TCPA, if he had a real case, should have just been a list of each tort Vic accused the defendants of and a list of evidence that supports those. Let's pick one tort they Vic accused the defendants: Tortious Interference. These are the elements of TI in Texas (source):
1) an existing contract subject to interference
2) a willful and intentional act of interference with the contract
3) that proximately caused the plaintiff's injury
4) caused actual damages or loss.
(technically you must also prove the "tort" part, but that's really just about bypassing an affirmative defense)
Ty's response to the TCPA motion should have at least included, for each defendant, a list of facts that, if taken at face value (that's the prima facie part, which means the judge just has to believe you are telling the truth). And, he shouldn't need discovery for this. If they have a real case, event without a physical contract, then Vic should have been able to state "I had an agreement to go to this convention and get paid X dollars [that satisfies 1 and 4]. That convention cancelled on me, and said it was because defendant did tort Y to get that contract broken [satisfying 2 and 3]."
According to the papers that have been filed so far, Ty didn't put forward clear and specific evidence of any of these claims. The closest thing that Ty came to meeting was 1 and maybe 4, and that's because Vic claimed there were some contracts that were cancelled, but there was never clear and specific evidence that they were cancelled because of the defendants. Even worse, defendants can argue that 1 and 4 were not argued clear and specifically, because in Vic's own deposition he admits he can't think of any contracts that have been cancelled because of this.
Anyways legal nerdery ends here. I look forward to posting again after any appeals (if they still happen).
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2019
Cross-posting because she hasn't gotten away free yet. Just Chupp being a Chump and Ty being a boomer with the filing.
Sindy on Twitter: "thats really fucked up/ this man is not even prove…
archived 8 Feb 2019 20:08:16 UTC
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
If the part about being told by the other party is true for the torts, that seems incredibly bullshit and basically makes it so TI doesn't exist. If you're being threatened and agree to the person making the threats terms, it's not that likely you'll willingly talk about it. TCPA seems like it's about people with money and influence trampling over those that lack it.
Imperial Agent
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2019
Z
The judge specifically disallowed the context you have here because it was in the 2nd amended pleading, he knew it existed.
She has gotten away unless Ty appeals.Cross-posting because she hasn't gotten away free yet. Just Chupp being a Chump and Ty being a boomer with the filing.
Sindy on Twitter: "thats really fucked up/ this man is not even prove…
archived 8 Feb 2019 20:08:16 UTCarchive.fo
View attachment 927284
View attachment 927282
The judge specifically disallowed the context you have here because it was in the 2nd amended pleading, he knew it existed.
LogWithTeeth
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
Following up on this, this is where Ty really screwed himself and the case. The August 30th filing wasn't just late, it was bad. He'd had a whole fucking month to get the thing written and filed, and it was incomprehensibly shit for what was supposedly the work product of an entire law firm. Notary issue notwithstanding, the entire motion was poorly written and would have gotten the judge slapping him around the ear in a just world.
...Then came the 2nd Amended Petition. And I've seen a whole bunch of idiocy in this thread about how Chupp completely blindsided Percy by throwing it out, and how he really fucked everything by doing that. You know what? Horseshit. Filing that? At that time? In what was obviously an attempt to end-run the deadline on a filing extension he himself had asked for? It was always, always, always going to get tossed out, and literally everybody with any experience with the legal system knew it.
Bosch_Lee
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
Cross-posting because she hasn't gotten away free yet. Just Chupp being a Chump and Ty being a boomer with the filing.
Sindy on Twitter: "thats really fucked up/ this man is not even prove…
archived 8 Feb 2019 20:08:16 UTC
View attachment 927284
View attachment 927282
Jesus, maybe if they had things a bit more organized and focused on the meat instead of creating a Bible sized document Ty would have remembered to bring that up during the hearing. What a cluster fuck. Ty got caught up being the cool E-celeb instead of doing his homework. This is seriously some highschool level type shit. I put more effort into school reports than Ty at this hearing. 200k down the drain.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Except in extraordinary circumstances, no.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2017
Apparently transcripts cost +$1000. So...
Similarly, if you accuse a person of TI, you have to have a contract (which Ty failed to even procure), and you have to connect them definitively to that contract being interfered with.
Ty failed on both counts.
Though I have one disagreement with you: I thought that from what we know, Ty failed to provide element 1 too, which fucks with element 4 (if you have no contract, how does the court know that you're not making up financial damages from thin air?).
The 2nd major point of failure for Vic's lawsuit was during the deposition stage btw, that was utterly disastrous for Vic's case (and Ty is directly to blame here, there was zero witness prep). And I still maintain that the 1st amended filing is/will be the 3rd point of failure.
If you're gonna accuse a person of stealing, you have to know what exactly was stolen and how they're connected to the act of stealing.
Similarly, if you accuse a person of TI, you have to have a contract (which Ty failed to even procure), and you have to connect them definitively to that contract being interfered with.
Ty failed on both counts.
Finally someone speaks sense.. The TCPA is a law that's designed to minimize the cost of frivolous lawsuits, and if you want to pass it, you need to prove that your case has merit and isn't just you being vindictive and trying to bankrupt people in a court of law.
Though I have one disagreement with you: I thought that from what we know, Ty failed to provide element 1 too, which fucks with element 4 (if you have no contract, how does the court know that you're not making up financial damages from thin air?).
The 2nd major point of failure for Vic's lawsuit was during the deposition stage btw, that was utterly disastrous for Vic's case (and Ty is directly to blame here, there was zero witness prep). And I still maintain that the 1st amended filing is/will be the 3rd point of failure.
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2019
To be fair, Ty was being too polite from the start. He gave all of the wiggle room in the world to the defendants under good will. Unfortunately, Chupp doesn't give a fuck about the case because he needs to go home and throw footballs. The defendants deposition was a dumpster fire, discovery was obviously abused because they failed to meet the deadline, Lemoine constantly moving the goalposts in the Rule 11 agreement just before the deadline, yet BHBH doesn't get a pass for obvious technical reasons. Seemed like Ty was depending too much on the Good Will of Judge Chump and forgot that you can't fight against SJWs with the premise of Good Will.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
And the other side will be bringing that up. So there won't be a clean appeal where the single issue is whether Chupp wrongly decided. There will also be arguing about whether even if he did wrongly decide based on the evidence, that evidence wasn't even in the record in the first place. The shambolic mess Chupp presided over will contribute to the chaos on appeal.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2019
The one thing that irks me is that failing in this fashion just means there is a need for MORE MONEY to be siphoned to this suit. I was really impressed that the remainder of the money was go to charity.
Though now it’s looking like there will be none remaining after all the proceedings and to me part of these issues that cost thousands upon thousands of dollars were easily avoidable
Though now it’s looking like there will be none remaining after all the proceedings and to me part of these issues that cost thousands upon thousands of dollars were easily avoidable
LogWithTeeth
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
Breaking: The real lulcows of this case weigh in on the judge's facebook. (quick law note: This is not how you get the judge to rule the way you want.)
Mr Florida Man
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
Wow, way to win the Judge's favour. Accusing someone of corruption and incompetence always makes them willing to give you another chance...
Breaking: The real lulcows of this case weigh in on the judge's facebook. (quick law note: This is not how you get the judge to rule the way you want.)
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
It is. He was indicted back in 2010 but beat the rap and is still a lawyer with no record of discipline. He's dropped the "Thug's Lawyer" monicker though.
BlehFail.451
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2019
I believe 'how embarrassing' sums that stuff up perfectly.
Breaking: The real lulcows of this case weigh in on the judge's facebook. (quick law note: This is not how you get the judge to rule the way you want.)