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

[Markorian]

This might just be the weirdest twist of the entire case. I really don't know what to make of it.

 

[A_throwaway_name62919]

After letting my initial WTF reaction settle, the only real reason I can think of for Chupp to order mediation at this time is if he thinks he fucked up. That he got the transcript of the hearing, sat down to write the most appeal proof ruling he could, started reviewing the relevant statutes, cited precedents, and evidence; only to realize that he couldn't actually make even a remotely appeal proof ruling. That he was on shakier legal ground than he'd thought, that Ty was on on stronger legal ground than he thought, that Ty had better evidence than he thought, that some of those rulings he'd made from the bench he shouldn't have made from the bench, or he'd made appealable mistakes in his handling of the hearing. Some combination of those that makes it so that no matter what he writes in his ruling he stands a good chance of decisions he'd made at the hearing being overturned on appeal, and that decisions he'd planned to make in his ruling are things he can't actually support enough to keep them from being overturned on appeal.

So now he's ordering them to mediation in hopes that someone will flinch and they settle. Them settling would keep him from having to reverse himself or issue a ruling that gets overturned on appeal. He may not have much hope that the mediation will work out and they settle, but he doesn't have much to lose by ordering them to try.

 

[Gehenna]

This might just be the weirdest twist of the entire case. I really don't know what to make of it.

I don't think anyone who actually knows anything about law knows what to make of it. Lots of speculation, but anyone trying to sell you that they know is pissing in the wind.

 

[lawtwitterthrowaway]

So both Drinky Crow and Superlawyer appear around the same time to caterwaul like broken records.

Hmm. Not suspect at all.

September 6th was a momentous time. There was a great outcry in the lawsphere, and then...whining; as of hundreds of preteens, bitching all at once.

That was a lot of words for you to say you were wrong

and that’s a hell of a stretch from your form of “it’s official Jamie won and she’s waiting for her money” to okay we’re waiting for appeals and rulings... which is exactly what I said

The court still has jurisdiction and you’re celebrating something that isn’t actually ruled on besides a non official or even “final” bench ruling

You seem to be confused again, so I'll help you. It is official. All claims against Jamie were dismissed from the bench by Chupp, and the only thing her lawyer need do for this portion of the litigation (up until the appeals, if any, get filed) is attempt to recover fees from Vic. Thus, her representative's presence at the conference should only consist of weighing the prospects of appeals versus the prospects of recovering damages from Vic.

Too funny because the Law Twits all said the secret folders from Lemonfurher weren’t ex parte and yet we learned he used theirs over what Ty wanted to hand him

Oh, this retardation again. Care to point where in the record this happened?

 

[Markorian]

Man, I wonder why this sped's firm isn't letting him within a mile of any cases, so much so that he has enough free time to spend it all on twitter and the farms. I suppose fetching coffee for the real attorneys in his building leaves him with hours of free time.

 

[Dumb Bitch Smoothie]

September 6th was a momentous time. There was a great outcry in the lawsphere, and then...whining; as of hundreds of preteens, bitching all at once.

I'm talking about today, you powdered donut. I couldn't care about how long you've been here. The fact that both of you have the listening skills of a toddler on cocaine and the reading comprehension of one the picture is becoming clearer and clearer.

You've already established just how incapable you are when it comes to listening because the only thing you're listening to is the sound of your guts based on how far your head is up your ass.

 

[Immortal Technique]

I'm talking about today, you powdered donut. I couldn't care about how long you've been here. The fact that both of you have the listening skills of a toddler on cocaine and the reading comprehension of one the picture is becoming clearer and clearer.

You've already established just how incapable you are when it comes to listening because the only thing you're listening to is the sound of your guts based on how far your head is up your ass.

The person basically said they're here to bait you all. Yet, some of yall go to slurp up the chum.

 

[ButterBar]

September 6th was a momentous time. There was a great outcry in the lawsphere, and then...whining; as of hundreds of preteens, bitching all at once.

Nick just said on stream you specifically should go on minecraft and kill yourself. Will you do it?

 

[Sheryl Nome]

Nick just said on stream you specifically should go on minecraft and kill yourself. Will you do it?

He was telling Dinky to kill himself. I know because he was responding to Dinky's sperg argument

 

[Dumb Bitch Smoothie]

View attachment 939728
The person basically said they're here to bait you all. Yet, some of yall go to slurp up the chum.

Is it really a successful baiting on their end if I'm enjoying myself?

 

[lawtwitterthrowaway]

View attachment 939728
The person basically said they're here to bait you all. Yet, some of yall go to slurp up the chum.

Frankly, I much prefer to bait engagement on the law. The insults are amusingly butthurt, but ultimately boring.

 

[Immortal Technique]

Is it really a successful baiting on their end if I'm enjoying myself?

You do you. Just don't think arguing with a brick wall ideology (here to purely to get responses) doesn't ascend you to levels of autisms.

 

[TherapyMan]

That’s not how court rulings work, nothing is even official until appeals or reconsideration. Not even a written decision is official until the court no longer retains jurisdiction.
Trigg V Moore 335 S.W.3d 243 (2010)
University of Tex Med Branch at Galveston V Estate of Blackmon 195 S W 3rd 98 100 (2006)

Is there an authority that is more on-point? Both these cases deal with the plaintiff filing of a non-suit motion where the timing of when the non-suit ends is effective as soon as the motion is filed. I understand that the dicta indicates that plenary jurisdiction ends at the time of the written order (which seems be derived from Rule 306(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure), and I'm not saying you're wrong to draw the inference that the trial court can change its mind and unilaterally modify its previous judgment prior to the issuing of the written order, but neither of these cases speak to the relative effectiveness of an oral judgment versus written order. Really all I'm looking for is something that states that the trial court's plenary power entitles it to modify its previously rendered judgment outside of a nunc pro tunc.

I've found some sources from the 1st Court of Appeals (Verret v. Verret, 570 S.W.2d 138, 140) and 11th Court of Appeals (Austin v. Austin, 553 S.W.2d 9, 10), which both stand for the contention that a trial court may modify its previous oral judgment prior to a written order, but I couldn't find controlling authorities in for Tarrant County, which is in the 2nd District.

 

[AnOminous]

I've found some sources from the 1st Court of Appeals (Verret v. Verret, 570 S.W.2d 138, 140) and 11th Court of Appeals (Austin v. Austin, 553 S.W.2d 9, 10), which both stand for the contention that a trial court may modify its previous oral judgment prior to a written order, but I couldn't find controlling authorities in for Tarrant County, which is in the 2nd District.

That's strongly suggestive, but I think that the issue may not be whether or not a court has jurisdiction to do that (modify a previous oral judgment prior to a written order) (which I think a court can do at the very least prior to a notice of appeal being filed) but whether it would be an abuse of discretion to do so in this case as it would prejudice one of the parties.

 

[Gehenna]

That's strongly suggestive, but I think that the issue may not be whether or not a court has jurisdiction to do that (modify a previous oral judgment prior to a written order) (which I think a court can do at the very least prior to a notice of appeal being filed) but whether it would be an abuse of discretion to do so in this case as it would prejudice one of the parties.

If a judge can lay out a strong argument that the new ruling is more proper than the prior one, I could see it flying. The argument would NEED to be stronger than the one for dismissal, and would require a mea culpa from the judge. This, I will stress, is not what I think IS the legal standard, but what I think SHOULD be the legal standard. Those two sometimes are not one and the same.

 

[NotaLolyer]

You seem to be confused again, so I'll help you. It is official. All claims against Jamie were dismissed from the bench by Chupp, and the only thing her lawyer need do for this portion of the litigation (up until the appeals, if any, get filed) is attempt to recover fees from Vic. Thus, her representative's presence at the conference should only consist of weighing the prospects of appeals versus the prospects of recovering damages from Vic.

You’re saying the same shit with different words again

Is there an authority that is more on-point? Both these cases deal with the plaintiff filing of a non-suit motion where the timing of when the non-suit ends is effective as soon as the motion is filed. I understand that the dicta indicates that plenary jurisdiction ends at the time of the written order (which seems be derived from Rule 306(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure), and I'm not saying you're wrong to draw the inference that the trial court can change its mind and unilaterally modify its previous judgment prior to the issuing of the written order, but neither of these cases speak to the relative effectiveness of an oral judgment versus written order. Really all I'm looking for is something that states that the trial court's plenary power entitles it to modify its previously rendered judgment outside of a nunc pro tunc.

I've found some sources from the 1st Court of Appeals (Verret v. Verret, 570 S.W.2d 138, 140) and 11th Court of Appeals (Austin v. Austin, 553 S.W.2d 9, 10), which both stand for the contention that a trial court may modify its previous oral judgment prior to a written order, but I couldn't find controlling authorities in for Tarrant County, which is in the 2nd District.

I’m also trying to find the specific tarrant county rule/ authority with regard to that but generally Judges have that power to reconsider their own judgements within a certain time

That's strongly suggestive, but I think that the issue may not be whether or not a court has jurisdiction to do that (modify a previous oral judgment prior to a written order) (which I think a court can do at the very least prior to a notice of appeal being filed) but whether it would be an abuse of discretion to do so in this case as it would prejudice one of the parties.

Therein lies the issue with Chupp straight up just ruling. I think he took a look at everything and really scratched his noggin on how to write something that doesn’t look prejudiced or appealable and doesn’t make him look bad in some way shape or form so we’re stuck with this Oder for Mediation, maybe there isn’t in fact anything that says he can definitively change his rulings even though he wants to.
In any case it definitely feels like he’s just done with all of this headache.

I can’t for the life of me look at those transcripts and ponder how in the fuck anyone thinks defamation wouldn’t stick with Chupp calling out Lemonfurher and his clients the way he did about proving stuff false... and shutting down him trying to get out of it without “full context” like Jamie, when clearly 300 Plus tweets kinda implies full context of defamation.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

This, I will stress, is not what I think IS the legal standard, but what I think SHOULD be the legal standard. Those two sometimes are not one and the same.

Sometimes I worry there's a lot of people commenting on this case not keeping that in mind, and that goes for both sides. That said, this case seems to have exposed some critical failures in how the legal system works, in particular regarding anti-SLAPP laws. If Vic's case is thrown out, I'd equate this to Maddox's lolsuit being allowed to go forward and LanDUI getting to conduct onerous discovery on everyone. It's an absolute disgrace to the legal system and a miscarriage of justice, and the fact it would be allowed to go ahead means people and politicians should take action. Denying people's 7th amendment rights (and forcing them to pay for this denial) can be just as bad as denying people's 1st amendment rights.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

I do have a question.

If I understand what happened in regards to the "Facebook threats" against Chupp, they were done towards an account that has been inactive for nearly a decade. How did Chupp find out about it to complain?

Marchi sent them to him, or reported them to the police so they'd be escalated. She did this knowing it was just some troll.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/weeb-wars-animegate-kickvic-vickicksback.53670/post-5347987

 

[Immaculate Ape]

Marchi sent them to him, or reported them to the police so they'd be escalated. She did this knowing it was just some troll.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/weeb-wars-animegate-kickvic-vickicksback.53670/post-5347987

View attachment 939796

It'd be so deliciously ironic that by getting these to Chupp days after she was dismissed from the case, wound up getting her ass back in and liable again.

 

[NotaLolyer]

So Nick just did something odd on stream where he was saying that one possibility for the mediation is ex parte communications from one party trying to get everything shut down. He said it would be too much like an anime, and would be too funny. Repeating the line too funny. Possibly signaling something he knows something Funimation is doing?

Marchi sent them to him, or reported them to the police so they'd be escalated. She did this knowing it was just some troll.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/weeb-wars-animegate-kickvic-vickicksback.53670/post-5347987

View attachment 939796

It'd be so deliciously ironic that by getting these to Chupp days after she was dismissed from the case, wound up getting her ass back in and liable again.

Maybe this is what Nick meant?