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

Look, its likely that Ty is wrong, but this is hardly a 'dunk' of a mistake to make.
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.
 
The 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 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.
Hm? I wonder if there is an archive of this podcast, cause it would be entertaining to listen to someone who ruffled their feathers. :p
 
  • Agree
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran
Honestly thats really low from T-greg because dunking on an atty when the caselaw is hardly clear isn't really reasonable.

Are you honestly surprised about the depths Low T-Greg will sink?

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

The Douche's true nature is similar to The Emperor's new clothes: completely transparent.
 
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

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.
 
So wait, I am reading this right?

"Judge Chupa Chups, the appeal the defence sent sucks and wont work
but strike the amended filing anyway
...Please?"
 
  • Agree
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran
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.
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.
 
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.
This is the most intelligent thing you have said in this entire thread. And it is PAINFULLY accurate.
 
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.
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.
 
Back