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

I doubt Lemonhitler could stand to depose Slatosch without his vocal cords giving out halfway through and he'd use his own incompetence when it comes to deposing as evidence that everything is wrong.

But they WON, remember? They're the WINNERS. They obviously won honestly and truly with nothing to worry about just as Lawtwitter foretold!

I've basically come to understand that Lawtwitter is the law equivalent of a bunch of teenage Call of Duty/general big shooter game players are specialists in combat and warfare.

"Just like the simulations."

Simulate this boot that's about to go up your ass, Lemonboy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL
quickthrowaway said:
I'm weary as to why Slatosch was talking to Lemon so easily in the first place.
Click to expand...

Mosquito-Man was careful to point out that Slatosch is apparently unrepresented. It is actually unethical and against a specific rule (4.02) to contact represented parties directly because of the opportunity of baffling them with bullshit, like he does. So he's not directly in violation of that rule but in general, with absolute nonsense like that mind-bending paragraph of absolute bullshit, he's trying to abuse his position as a lawyer against an unrepresented party and a non-party to the suit (4.03-04).

Specifically, see the comments to rules 4.03-04 in the rules. Throwing out a completely unfounded, bullshit accusation of perjury against a third party is more or less in violation of the spirit of that rule.

1572386372920.png


He's dancing around the rules. He's scummy enough not to be directly in violation of them, although the implication of such an accusation is "do my bidding or else I'll have you criminally prosecuted for perjury."

So he's hurling utterly false accusations of perjury in order to coerce Slatosch, a nonlawyer and an unrepresented non-party, into unlawfully disclosing privileged material.

Real piece of shit this guy is.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Maraschino, The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, ConSluttant and 23 others
AnOminous said:
Mosquito-Man was careful to point out that Slatosch is apparently unrepresented. It is actually unethical and against a specific rule (4.02) to contact represented parties directly because of the opportunity of baffling them with bullshit, like he does. So he's not directly in violation of that rule but in general, with absolute nonsense like that mind-bending paragraph of absolute bullshit, he's trying to abuse his position as a lawyer against an unrepresented party and a non-party to the suit (4.03-04).

Specifically, see the comments to rules 4.03-04 in the rules. Throwing out a completely unfounded, bullshit accusation of perjury against a third party is more or less in violation of the spirit of that rule.

View attachment 989926

He's dancing around the rules. He's scummy enough not to be directly in violation of them, although the implication of such an accusation is "do my bidding or else I'll have you criminally prosecuted for perjury."
Click to expand...
I tried to read that but my eyes sort of glazed over and suddenly it was night time, there's two empty bottles of whisky on my desk and I'm filled with rage. Is this what it feels like to be a lawyer?
 
  • Winner
  • Feels
  • DRINK!
Reactions: The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, ConSluttant, EmuWarsVeteran and 7 others
AnOminous said:
Mosquito-Man was careful to point out that Slatosch is apparently unrepresented. It is actually unethical and against a specific rule (4.02) to contact represented parties directly because of the opportunity of baffling them with bullshit, like he does. So he's not directly in violation of that rule but in general, with absolute nonsense like that mind-bending paragraph of absolute bullshit, he's trying to abuse his position as a lawyer against an unrepresented party and a non-party to the suit (4.03-04).

Specifically, see the comments to rules 4.03-04 in the rules. Throwing out a completely unfounded, bullshit accusation of perjury against a third party is more or less in violation of the spirit of that rule.

View attachment 989926

He's dancing around the rules. He's scummy enough not to be directly in violation of them, although the implication of such an accusation is "do my bidding or else I'll have you criminally prosecuted for perjury."
Click to expand...

I posted this EARLIER, I can't keep track of threads or where I am posting, I am now going to go to bed. It appears the drunk robot is more coherent than I right now. Either way, would be fun to know more about:
If that is the case, that would probably be after the date set for their Sanctions hearing which is the 21st.
They did however file this the 23rd......
Usually those 30 days are business days aren't they?

Reading and learning:
"Since the 1999 change to the Rules, a party can subpoena nonparties for documents without requesting a deposition. TEX.R.CIV.P. 205.3. This is more convenient—for both parties and nonparties—because it eliminates the time and expense of depositions while still allowing parties to obtain information. Before serving a nonparty with a subpoena for documents, there are certain steps that parties must follow. Specifically, a party must first serve a notice to produce documents or tangible things—on both the nonparty and all parties to the litigation—“at least 10 days before the subpoena compelling production is served.” TEX.R.CIV.P.205.2.The party must serve this notice “a reasonable time before the response is due but no later than 30 days before the end of any applicable discovery period. TEX.R.CIV.P. 205.3(a) ”

O'wise one. Is it a possibility that they will simply put these 'rules' aside and just go 'yeah sure you can do that lemon-man'?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, ConSluttant, EmuWarsVeteran and 5 others
I can imagine the rest of the lawyers aren't doing anything because they've drank themselves into a coma, but what the hell is Casey Erick doing? Technically he and the Fuhrer are representing the same clients, so why the hell is he allowing this to go on? Casey's first filings were egregious and annoying, but not criminal like what the Fuhrer clearly is. What the hell is that misogynist lawyer(notice how KV never brings that up) doing, and what does the Fuhrer have over him to let him take the reins?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran
FGO-Professor-P2PBTW said:
I can imagine the rest of the lawyers aren't doing anything because they've drank themselves into a coma, but what the hell is Casey Erick doing? Technically he and the Fuhrer are representing the same clients, so why the hell is he allowing this to go on? Casey's first filings were egregious and annoying, but not criminal like what the Fuhrer clearly is. What the hell is that misogynist lawyer(notice how KV never brings that up) doing, and what does the Fuhrer have over him to let him take the reins?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure Casey was fired for his misogynistic outburst against Carey during Toye's deposition. I've got nothing to back this up, but I haven't seen his name anywhere in filings since the depositions happened. so I'm calling it an educated guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EmuWarsVeteran
FGO-Professor-P2PBTW said:
I can imagine the rest of the lawyers aren't doing anything because they've drank themselves into a coma, but what the hell is Casey Erick doing? Technically he and the Fuhrer are representing the same clients, so why the hell is he allowing this to go on? Casey's first filings were egregious and annoying, but not criminal like what the Fuhrer clearly is. What the hell is that misogynist lawyer(notice how KV never brings that up) doing, and what does the Fuhrer have over him to let him take the reins?
Click to expand...
Casey is a sexist pig, not a gay-ops master. There are things he refuses to do because he prolly thinks his cilents are nucking futs. That or he's just lazy bare minimum lawyer with all those "objection to forms" and stuff.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: The Demon Pimp of Razgriz and EmuWarsVeteran
Casey was a funny dude roped into the lawsuit because the defendants lied about their case to him. He tried a few underhanded tactics, but mostly just increasingly shrunk into the void whispering "I told him to stop tweeting..." and "objection...to form..."

I don't think they hired the Fuhrer because he was a TCPA 'specialist', I think someone in the office knew that Lemonman was an unhinged nutbag who would possibly attempt murder just to get his case to a win.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, ddlloo, theworstkindofeurofag and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back