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

[Allanon]

There's no clear authority if it is or isn't a trial

If the TCPA hearing was a trial, then Ty's trial amendment of the affadavits should have been allowed

Isn't it also worth noting that even if rule 63 applies to the 2AP, the fact that the defendants got to violate their rule 11 agreements mean that swapping out the affidavits for the declarations in the TCPA response shouldn't be an issue for the plaintiff, as the only issue there was a rule 11 agreement?

Although, even if all else fails, while the TCPA response will be weaker without those affidavits and 2AP - just going worst case and losing both - the information required to make it through TCPA would still be present, because the bar is just that low.

Why can't you believe it? He's self proclaimed as pro-free speech, of course he's in favor of anti-slapp laws. Nick is very much an... aberration, in this regard, and I think a lot of people are just parroting him without much reflection on how useful anti-slapp statutes can be, especially coming from a site like this. Most free speech advocates want it to be difficult for plaintiffs to bury defendants in legal fees unless they can make a early showing of merit.

I hear a bunch of explanations for what happened from different sectors:
1. Anti-slapp is bad
2. Chupp is a moron \ didn't follow the law
3. Beard fucked up royally
4. Vic's accusers are basically truthful

If 2,3 or 4 are correct then TCPA isn't the issue. I think most people have been blaming the judge for not following the law which doesn't mean it's a bad law.

I don't think Nick has a problem with the idea of protecting free speech, as he's very pro-free speech. He has a problem with the fact that anti-slapp laws - especially, apparently, TCPA - don't accomplish what they set out to do and are extremely vague and confusing. Probably because it's very difficult to make laws and processes do what they want anti-SLAPP laws to do.

 

[secondclass]

It's a little strange that so many folks think the judge was completely out of line for excluding evidence that was 1) fraudulently notarized; and/or 2) submitted after the briefing deadline.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

It's a little strange that so many folks think the judge was completely out of line for excluding evidence that was 1) fraudulently notarized; and/or 2) submitted after the briefing deadline.

1. That's not the only thing he excluded.
2. It wasn't after the deadline.
3. He let the defendants submit evidence after the deadline.

 

[mindlessobserver]

It's a little strange that so many folks think the judge was completely out of line for excluding evidence that was 1) fraudulently notarized; and/or 2) submitted after the briefing deadline.

The notary issue was a minor fuck up that was corrected. And filing deadlines are meant to prevent people from deliberately delaying the process. The fact that Ty submitted things 2 hours late is irrelevant because it didn't delay things. Arguing otherwise is a sort of pedantry is never upheld by the courts no matter the venue.

 

[AnOminous]

The notary issue was a minor fuck up that was corrected.

It wasn't corrected, though. The original affidavits were withdrawn and are thus not part of the record. The unsworn declarations were attached to the second amended petition, which was excluded in its entirety. Vital evidence to the case was not considered by Chupp because it was not in the record.

 

[WarJams]

1. That's not the only thing he excluded.
2. It wasn't after the deadline.
3. He let the defendants submit evidence after the deadline.

Not just after any ol' deadline, after the statutory deadline. He allowed the defense to violate the actual law. Not the theoretical spirit of a Rule 11 gentlemen's agreement that says they'll both play nice. The actual fucking TCPA itself. Chupp is such a fuck up. I sure as fuck hope that gets highlighted to the appeals court.

 

[mindlessobserver]

It wasn't corrected, though. The original affidavits were withdrawn and are thus not part of the record. The unsworn declarations were attached to the second amended petition, which was excluded in its entirety. Vital evidence to the case was not considered by Chupp because it was not in the record.

I figured there was clerical shenanigans and then Chupps chuppery prevented things from getting filed properly.

 

[Dr. Geronimo]

It wasn't corrected, though. The original affidavits were withdrawn and are thus not part of the record. The unsworn declarations were attached to the second amended petition, which was excluded in its entirety. Vital evidence to the case was not considered by Chupp because it was not in the record.

Wasn't Chupp real fucky about the 2AP though? Couldn't Ty argue that Chupp didn't give a clear answer on it until after the hearing, so he couldn't argue for it?

 

[I can't imagine]

Wasn't Chupp real fucky about the 2AP though? Couldn't Ty argue that Chupp didn't give a clear answer on it until after the hearing, so he couldn't argue for it?

The plaintiffs' counsel can, and probably will argue it. The main issue is that it is very much not settled law, so it could go either way regardless of Chupp's decision.

 

[AnOminous]

Wasn't Chupp real fucky about the 2AP though? Couldn't Ty argue that Chupp didn't give a clear answer on it until after the hearing, so he couldn't argue for it?

Yes, super fucky. He didn't exclude it perhaps until after he actually read it and realized no way he could make the stupid fucking ruling he had made if it was in evidence. And he claimed at the hearing he actually was considering them. So at some point, he flat out lied.

 

[10SorrowfulObject]

Except that isn't the explanation and never has been. Nick pretty much confirmed it, but there was a lot of last-minute work done on the filing - as in work done on ther day it was filed - because certain elements only came together right then. I'm still sticking by my theory that they made a lot of late changes after Hsu came on to the case, but it's also clear that they were scrambling to get Huber's affidavit included at the very last moment and had to re-arrange evidence to align with it, all of which led to a rushed, and consequently sloppy filing.

No.

This is not a scenario where he got some last minute information that necessitated some minor restructuring of the filing, and as a result the information didn't flow properly. I know what that looks like, and this isn't it. Last minute changes usually have an uncanny valley quality to them; everything is put together but it isn't quite as polished as it could be. This, on the other hand, is thoroughly shoddy work in areas that have nothing to do with the Huber affidavit.

This filing, a response to a TCPA Motion to Dismiss, is something that Ty SHOULD have been drafting the moment he filed the lawsuit. Why? Because the defendants filing this motion was fucking inevitable. There's no excuse for being unprepared for this motion. Fuck, he should've been prepared for it even before he filed the suit.

It's easy to sit here and criticise (and necessary, I won't pretend otherwise), but a little bit of empathy goes a long way in situations like this, and anyone who hasn't been on the wrong end of a deadline, waiting for vital documentation or information right up the wire, likely can't fully appreciate what it's like to be working in these conditions.

I have been in those situations and that's why I know this isn't what's happening. The only time I've turned in something this shoddy is when I completely fucked off and tried to pull an all-nighter the night before.

 

[AlexJonesGotMePregnant]

No.

This is not a scenario where he got some last minute information that necessitated some minor restructuring of the filing, and as a result the information didn't flow properly. I know what that looks like, and this isn't it. Last minute changes usually have an uncanny valley quality to them; everything is put together but it isn't quite as polished as it could be. This, on the other hand, is thoroughly shoddy work in areas that have nothing to do with the Huber affidavit.

This filing, a response to a TCPA Motion to Dismiss, is something that Ty SHOULD have been drafting the moment he filed the lawsuit. Why? Because the defendants filing this motion was fucking inevitable. There's no excuse for being unprepared for this motion. Fuck, he should've been prepared for it even before he filed the suit.


I have been in those situations and that's why I know this isn't what's happening. The only time I've turned in something this shoddy is when I completely fucked off and tried to pull an all-nighter the night before.

It is old and boring to rehash whether or not Ty fucked up with that filing. It was obviously fucked up. You're not even talking about the law at this point, just about how you think you're a better lawyer than Ty. You can go masturbate in his thread if you want, it's his birthday.

 

[SiccDicc]

Why can't you believe it? He's self proclaimed as pro-free speech, of course he's in favor of anti-slapp laws. Nick is very much an... aberration, in this regard, and I think a lot of people are just parroting him without much reflection on how useful anti-slapp statutes can be, especially coming from a site like this. Most free speech advocates want it to be difficult for plaintiffs to bury defendants in legal fees unless they can make a early showing of merit.

I hear a bunch of explanations for what happened from different sectors:
1. Anti-slapp is bad
2. Chupp is a moron \ didn't follow the law
3. Beard fucked up royally
4. Vic's accusers are basically truthful

If 2,3 or 4 are correct then TCPA isn't the issue. I think most people have been blaming the judge for not following the law which doesn't mean it's a bad law.

Really? He didn't seem to mind the asinine gag order on Eron Gjoni that took Volokh to intervene on, at the very least I didn't see him decrying it. It's kind of why I have a hard time taking his points seriously if he's capable of that kind of dissonance.

Maybe I'm just a curmudgeon, but any law that is open to a broad interpretation tends to piss me off. Mostly because I've been raised to never underestimate the stupidity of someone; especially those in positions of authority such as judges. I agree that SLAPPs are bad, but I'm not so sure Anti-SLAPPs are any better. Instead of advancing forward towards a proper solution, such as the one @DragoonSierra pointed out regarding court costs, we seem intent on just using the same old poison to treat the disease. Oh sure, it gets rid of said disease, but it's still hurting the body and may be ridding us of beneficial cells. In some cases, it actually stops legitimate lawsuits moving forward. I'm not going to debate Vic's case as legitimate or not for concern of bias, but there are people out there that get screwed by judges who do not interpret the spirit of the law adequately and that's a fault in the law itself as much as the judge. If the law is not easy to follow it's not really much of a law at all and will continue to do harm in my opinion.

As for the court costs, I don't think any nation really matches up to our chicanery. Lawyers I've met from other nations, while on vacation to be clear, are often aghast at the cost of US attorneys... well, either aghast or jealous.

 

[Dumb Bitch Smoothie]

The reason why law and legal counsel in the United States is so expensive is because (((they))) are involved.

But this isn't supposed to be a conspiracy thread. We're getting close to conspiracies, but not quite.

Just remember to follow your nose if you smell bullshit.

 

[AnOminous]

Really? He didn't seem to mind the asinine gag order on Eron Gjoni that took Volokh to intervene on, at the very least I didn't see him decrying it.

"Muh whammens" outweighs the Constitution.

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

Really? He didn't seem to mind the asinine gag order on Eron Gjoni that took Volokh to intervene on, at the very least I didn't see him decrying it. It's kind of why I have a hard time taking his points seriously if he's capable of that kind of dissonance.

Yeah one of the things that has stopped me from getting too invested in one side of this whole mess is that everyone seems happy to use, redefine or hide behind the concept of free speech when convenient.

 

[ConSluttant]

No.

This is not a scenario where he got some last minute information that necessitated some minor restructuring of the filing, and as a result the information didn't flow properly. I know what that looks like, and this isn't it. Last minute changes usually have an uncanny valley quality to them; everything is put together but it isn't quite as polished as it could be. This, on the other hand, is thoroughly shoddy work in areas that have nothing to do with the Huber affidavit.

This filing, a response to a TCPA Motion to Dismiss, is something that Ty SHOULD have been drafting the moment he filed the lawsuit. Why? Because the defendants filing this motion was fucking inevitable. There's no excuse for being unprepared for this motion. Fuck, he should've been prepared for it even before he filed the suit.


I have been in those situations and that's why I know this isn't what's happening. The only time I've turned in something this shoddy is when I completely fucked off and tried to pull an all-nighter the night before.

Something I think y'all are forgetting... The reason it was so late was because the website didn't accept the filing and they had to compress it further - which resulted in the broken links that led to citations going nowhere.

This was a technical issue not a "hurt durr we haven't finished writing this " error. Saying that it shows that Ty et al are incompetent is just stupid. Step back a few and breathe y'all.

 

[Garm]

It's a little strange that so many folks think the judge was completely out of line for excluding evidence that was 1) fraudulently notarized; and/or 2) submitted after the briefing deadline.

No.

This is not a scenario where he got some last minute information that necessitated some minor restructuring of the filing, and as a result the information didn't flow properly. I know what that looks like, and this isn't it. Last minute changes usually have an uncanny valley quality to them; everything is put together but it isn't quite as polished as it could be. This, on the other hand, is thoroughly shoddy work in areas that have nothing to do with the Huber affidavit.

This filing, a response to a TCPA Motion to Dismiss, is something that Ty SHOULD have been drafting the moment he filed the lawsuit. Why? Because the defendants filing this motion was fucking inevitable. There's no excuse for being unprepared for this motion. Fuck, he should've been prepared for it even before he filed the suit.


I have been in those situations and that's why I know this isn't what's happening. The only time I've turned in something this shoddy is when I completely fucked off and tried to pull an all-nighter the night before.

There is a problem with the "shit motion" theory.

1. The system rejected it because of file size. They compressed the file so the algorithm fucked the document.

2. It was disregarded because the defendants claimed "surprise." The material in the document was not supposed to be considered. A "good" filing would not prevent this.

3. If Chupp is such a stickler for good motions, then he should have tossed the TCPA motions. They had improperly cited pages, exhibit letters were used several times and, as An0minous pointed out, they actually violated Texas Rules of Civil Procedure for crappy formatting.

Chupp either has double standards regarding plantiff's and defendants or he doesn't know what he is doing.

 

[secondclass]

There is a problem with the "shit motion" theory.

1. The system rejected it because of file size. They compressed the file so the algorithm fucked the document.

2. It was disregarded because the defendants claimed "surprise." The material in the document was not supposed to be considered. A "good" filing would not prevent this.

3. If Chupp is such a stickler for good motions, then he should have tossed the TCPA motions. They had improperly cited pages, exhibit letters were used several times and, as An0minous pointed out, they actually violated Texas Rules of Civil Procedure for crappy formatting.

Chupp either has double standards regarding plantiff's and defendants or he doesn't know what he is doing.

Nobody, including Chupp, cares that the response was filed at 12:30am instead of the midnight deadline. Chupp even accepted the filesize excuse and deemed the 12:30am filing as timely.

But then, because of the notary fuckup, Ty WITHDREW the affidavits, and tried to refile them a couple days later. Those were filed late. He could have filed on time (and did, except for the notary thing, and the fact that the affidavits are non-identical, which is a major problem imho). Then he un-filed the fucked up affidavits and tried to re-file late.

Also, WTF is an Exhibit letter? And why do the Kiwis think that sending Chupp a letter in is inappropriate? The letter vs. motion thing is purely stylistic. In some courts, almost all the motions/briefs are written in letter format. For example, in New Jersey, the court's own suggested brief format is in a letter style. See: https://njcourts.gov/forms/11898_create_brief_sample_letter.pdf

In libertarian Texas, you can do whatever you want stylistically (vs. California, which has very particular style rules). The only general requirements for a motion/brief/request for relief are (Tex. R. Civ. P. 21):
1) It has to be in writing (unless during trial/hearing);
2) It has to be signed by a lawyer or the litigant himself (if he doesn't have a lawyer);
3) It has to be filed of record;
4) It has to be served on all lawyers (or parties, if unrepresented) to the case. This part automatically happens at step 3 now, because when you file anything, the electronic filing system immediately e-mails the filing to all the lawyers on a case.

Now lets look at the letters to Chupp. They are all 1) in writing; 2) signed; 3) e-filed; and therefore 4) automatically served on everyone. They function exactly the same as any other written motion/brief/application/etc to the court. I've known some Boomer lawyers that are in the habit of doing almost everything via letter motion or letter brief, even at the Texas Supreme Court level (although that's damned informal, if you ask me).

More relevantly for Vic, the Fort Worth Court of Appeals explicitly permits motions and briefs by letter. (2nd Court of Appeals Local Rule 1.D: https://www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa/practice-before-the-court/local-rules/rules/).

So back to my question: WTF is an Exhibit letter?

 

[Kosher Salt]

But then, because of the notary fuckup, Ty WITHDREW the affidavits, and tried to refile them a couple days later. Those were filed late.

Isn't withdrawing the affidavits an amendment to the motion? And wasn't it too late to amend it?