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

[Markorian]

I looked up the meaning of Libel Proof and hate to admit it. It kinda lines up with Vic. Since these are rumors that have been spurring up for years.

Libel-proof means your reputation was so bad that damaging it is impossible, which makes defamation impossible as it relies on damages. The simple fact that cons cancelled Vic over this is proof that he's not libel-proof.

 

[AnIncredibleDerp]

I looked up the meaning of Libel Proof and hate to admit it. It kinda lines up with Vic. Since these are rumors that have been spurring up for years.

How the hell does he get neverending lines at any con he goes to then?

 

[Son of Sparda 84]

Libel-proof means your reputation was so bad that damaging it is impossible, which makes defamation impossible as it relies on damages. The simple fact that cons cancelled Vic over this is proof that he's not libel-proof.

Oh how stupid of me. Makes sense. How did the judge label him that when obvious damages happened to him like cons cancelling?

 

[Markorian]

Oh how stupid of me. Makes sense. How did the judge label him that when obvious damages happened to him like cons cancelling?

You might be thinking of public figure, which just raises the bar for defamation.

 

[5t3n0g0ph3r]

The Court proposed order granting the Motion to Continue the November 21st hearing (unsigned):

 

[AnIncredibleDerp]

Motion to Continue Hearing on November 21st

Wait why would Vic's counsel want to extend the hearing?

 

[Nontransferable]

Wait why would Vic's counsel want to extend the hearing?

They are asking to push it back by at least two weeks to allow them additional time to prepare.

The Court granting the Motion to Continue the November 21st hearing (unsigned):

That's a proposed order for the judge to sign. The court hasn't granted the motion yet.

 

[TheClappening]

Wait why would Vic's counsel want to extend the hearing?

They have to address each point that each defendant brings up. Otherwise they waive their right to object to those points, and Chupp can just wave on through the $1 million plus or whatever dollar amount the defendants want.

I think it's just covering all bases for possible worst timeline. If they let the massive fees and sanctions go through, and the appeals court pulls a Chupp, Vic stands to lose a lot of money. So they're just making sure it doesn't happen.

Also gives them time to work on the appeal itself.

 

[Apteryx Owenii]

How the hell does he get neverending lines at any con he goes to then?

Being popular does not negate one's ability to be defamed. And IIRC the plaintiff is attempting to claim per se defamation (among other torts) which doesn't even require them to prove that Vic was monetarily damaged. For example, if someone comes out in public and says you're a child molester you don't have to prove that you were adversely economically effected in order to secure damages against them.

 

[AnIncredibleDerp]

Being popular does not negate one's ability to be defamed. And IIRC the plaintiff is attempting to claim per se defamation (among other torts) which doesn't even require them to prove that Vic was monetarily damaged. For example, if someone comes out in public and says you're a child molester you don't have to prove that you were adversely economically effected in order to secure damages against them.

My point is quite the opposite. If you're popular, you definitely CAN be defamed.

 

[TheClappening]

For example, if someone comes out in public and says you're a child molester you don't have to prove that you were adversely economically effected in order to secure damages against them.

I don't know about that. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that defamation per se just means you don't have to prove a numerical value for damages in your initial pleadings. The defamation against you is so heinous you assume it would damage you. Eventually you'll have to prove an actual number, with testimony, expert witnesses, etc.

 

[Sheryl Nome]

I don't know about that. I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that defamation per se just means you don't have to prove a numerical value for damages in your initial pleadings. The defamation against you is so heinous you assume it would damage you. Eventually you'll have to prove an actual number, with testimony, expert witnesses, etc.

Thats for determing that the damages are, you don't have to prove damage to assert the claim and get pass a MTD because the damage is presumed.

 

[TheClappening]

Thats for determing that the damages are, you don't have to prove damage to assert the claim and get pass a MTD because the damage is presumed.

Probably didn't read his "secure damages" part right. I assumed he meant secure damages, as in get a numerical value at damages phase. He probably meant secure damages as in getting a favorable verdict.

 

[Bender]

Holy shit it costs nearly $3,500 to submit an appeal?

 

[Harvey Danger]

Holy shit it costs nearly $3,500 to submit an appeal?

So much for the TCPA reducing costs, since it's always appealed.

(I think it's based on the number of pages transferred to the COA from the trial court's record, and considering there's roughly 47 billion pages filed so far...)

Edit: guys at BHBC, could you please get a grip on the typos? It's a 2 page motion, proofreading isn't hard.

 

[10SorrowfulObject]

So much for the TCPA reducing costs, since it's always appealed.

(I think it's based on the number of pages transferred to the COA from the trial court's record, and considering there's roughly 47 billion pages filed so far...)

Edit: guys at BHBC, could you please get a grip on the typos? It's a 2 page motion, proofreading isn't hard.

View attachment 1011805

TCPA reduces costs for the defendants because it shortcuts the trial, and assigns costs to the plaintiff. Lawyers are still expensive.

This one was signed by Ryan Sellers at Martinez-Hsu. Unless he's signing his name to BHBH's work product, we can't blame this on Ty.

 

[AnOminous]

TCPA reduces costs for the defendants because it shortcuts the trial, and assigns costs to the plaintiff.

Who absolutely always pays. You dumb mother.

 

[Harvey Danger]

TCPA reduces costs for the defendants because it shortcuts the trial, and assigns costs to the plaintiff. Lawyers are still expensive.

It shortcuts the trial if it goes through. If everyone files a TCPA motion to take a shot at it, and every TCPA decision gets appealed by at least one side, then it adds to the cost of the average defamation lawsuit, for everyone including the defendant.

Whether the total reductions for successful TCPA claims outweigh the total additional costs that everyone pays is an empirical question. I don't know that anyone's collected data to make that kind of statewide calculation. But its mere existence creates a demonstrable, practically guaranteed, additional cost.

This one was signed by Ryan Sellers at Martinez-Hsu. Unless he's signing his name to BHBH's work product, we can't blame this on Ty.

Sure, but as Ty said last night on Nick's stream, he is still the lead attorney on the case. So the buck stops at his desk over at BHBC.

(It might be unfair to blame him for Martinez-Hsu's typos if he's delegating, but fairness is low priority when I'm doing grammar nitpicking shitposts.)

 

[AnOminous]

Sure, but as Ty said last night on Nick's stream, he is still the lead attorney on the case. So the buck stops at his desk over at BHBC.

Indeed. You can blame Ty for literally anything that goes out under Vic's name in this case. When you're the named partner and your name is first in the firm's name, fucking EVERYTHING is your fault.

That's just how it goes.

 

[10SorrowfulObject]

Who absolutely always pays. You dumb mother.

Clear from context blah blah blah. Try better.