- Joined
- Oct 24, 2019
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.
You know all about not committing to things, don't you, Greg boi, say how is that wife and kid?douccete at it again with his shitty takes, what a dumb ass
Whenever I'm having a bad day and being hard on myself, I try to just remember that no matter what I do, I will never be as pathetic as this sack of fecal matter in an unconvincing human flesh suit.douccete at it again with his shitty takes, what a dumb ass
It's not even a mistake, it's literally a damned if you do, damned worse if you don't. It was a covering of bases, which he wouldn't have had if he didn't file. Basically lemoine and greg "child leaving" douchette are making it a bigger deal than it actually is, what else is new, check please.Look, its likely that Ty is wrong, but this is hardly a 'dunk' of a mistake to make.
How does a guy who would die from 3 minutes (being generous) of sexual intercourse call people incels?
Hm? I wonder if there is an archive of this podcast, cause it would be entertaining to listen to someone who ruffled their feathers. :pThe expectedly shitty take from expectedly shitty people.
Erring on the side of caution isn't a mistake, especially when the goddamn courts can't figure out when the most appropriate time to file is. These twatter lawyers are dishonest brokers, this is exactly the sort of shit those ALAB podcaster guys called them out on a few weeks ago that made twatter law shit their collective pants.
The only thing lower is his bank account, but that's because it's in the negatives.Honestly thats really low from T-greg because dunking on an atty when the caselaw is hardly clear isn't really reasonable.
Honestly thats really low from T-greg because dunking on an atty when the caselaw is hardly clear isn't really reasonable.
Honestly this just really shows T-greg's true nature, can you even be the slightest bit charitable? I think Ty's wrong but this isn't an unreasonable move given the ambiguity
Too obvious man, you gotta get better at this.Ty is beyond incompetent.
Honestly this just really shows T-greg's true nature, can you even be the slightest bit charitable? I think Ty's wrong but this isn't an unreasonable move given the ambiguity
Try harder. I am one of the most vociferous critics of Mr. Beard, and even I don't think this was incompetency on his part.Ty is beyond incompetent.
Welcome to the horrors of appeals in the USA. There's a reason there lawyers who focus their entire practice on appeals, sometimes within a single district. You don't even just have to deal with circuit splits, you have to deal with splits within the individual circuit on occasion: rolling the dice and happening to get the two or three judges on your randomly selected panel who are predisposed to disliking your case. Our legal system is based off of shit we inherited from Britain, and most of the bones of it are 100-500 years old.There's a nice write up here https://www.dickinson-wright.com/-/...hash=3FFFFB27963D3AB1EBE898FE811C98839AA11100 about TCPA and proecdures and such, and under "Appeals", it does say that it is ambiguous as to whether the appeal following the dismissal or an appeal following judgement is proper. It appears to be up to the discretion of the appeals court.
This is the most intelligent thing you have said in this entire thread. And it is PAINFULLY accurate.Welcome to the horrors of appeals in the USA. There's a reason there lawyers who focus their entire practice on appeals, sometimes within a single district. You don't even just have to deal with circuit splits, you have to deal with splits within the individual circuit on occasion: rolling the dice and happening to get the two or three judges on your randomly selected panel who are predisposed to disliking your case. Our legal system is based off of shit we inherited from Britain, and most of the bones of it are 100-500 years old.
Chupp knew that this case would go to appeals regardless of how he ruled on the TCPA motion. Considering that the appeals court has already had to deal with some serious Chupp-ups in the recent past, he'd be exceptional to anatagonize them further. But that's just my uninformed layman's take.Frankly, given Chupp's apparent allergy to doing anything resembling actual work on this case, I wouldn't be surprised if he just decided to let it go to the appellate court and let them work out if he should even bother determining attorney's fees/sanctions. I'm not sure if he's actually allowed to do that, but it hasn't stopped him yet.