Actually, Chupp is basically an extreme example of WHY you do it. Different judges have a different tolerance for what counts as reasonable evidence for an evidentiary burden. Chupp, for reasons that defy logic, wanted the next level of evidence than what was needed. Had Beard aimed for it, as caution dictates he should have, he MIGHT have succeeded.
Mind, that still means Chupps a fucking idiot.
As an addendum: Frankly, Beard's actions are... baffling to me. There was no reason to not throw everything they had at the TCPA. If they built it up with everything they very clearly had or should have had, they probably could have beaten an actual summary judgement let alone the TCPA. Perhaps there is a reason to withold evidence, in which case
@AnOminous , please fill me in on it.
Addendum two: Lets run through this.
1: Throw in the affidavits first, lock that shit
down.
2: Get numbers for the early damages, make note of damages unable to be found out without discovery. CLEARLY delineate the two, put the onus on the defendants.
3: Attempt to preserve and gather evidence, discovery may be stayed but that only means you can't compel people. You can still ask politely. Find discords, mentions of phone calls, find evidence you can clearly point to for at LEAST a reasonable glance and that the judge can take a glance at and go "Yah, that's suspicious". Do this for everything, not just select things.
4: Any and all communications the Plaintiff received, declaring broken contracts, people pulling out, etc, put that IN.
5: Structure the damn thing better. Don't be fancy with the language, be blunt. Once your message is 100% clear, then make it sound nicer.
6: index every single piece of this, this is why you do 5, now you have a clear roadmap that you can look at the table of contents of and get a picture of it.