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

Dyn said:
Oh well there's no disciplinary action being taken there either so cheer up, your favourite anime rapist is going to get away with it.
Click to expand...
Great job for baiting me.
However "Innocent until proven guilty" is, like, the basis of every trials, those who do not even understand such a simple sentence are just fools with no general culture.
As for the trial coming for the defendants (Funimation & Co in case you didn't understood.), for now they have no defense except for words.
Guess what ? Words. Aren't. Proofs. (Especially since the Monica version changed at least 5 times, one version being from perjurer what's-his-face.)
Zero pictures & Zero recordings, only words from nobodies on Internet (Debunked times and times again, like, Vic weren't at these conventions or just straight out lying people who admired Vic before but decided to jump on the hate wagon.)

They expected to show at the court with no proofs whatsoever or wants to try some sort of Ace Attorney tomfoolery with """Proofs""" coming from their pockets as if it would work.
If that were to happen the Judges would laugh and discard these because : Every. Proofs. Needs. To. Be. Presented. Prior. To. The. Trial.

As for when Ron says that he will present proofs soon, we are still waiting for these, and knowing how much of an early ejaculator he is concerning proofs throughout this case, we can safely assume that he has none.

Also I couldn't help but notice that he is actively reading every pages of the past files filled by Ty & Co, as if he could understand anything but, eh, anything in order to get Ron's sweet sweet money must be saying his lawyer.

As for Funimation for now...Fubar, but we are waiting.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: knux, GenericReviewerDraco, Riku and 1 other person
Maraschino said:
One of the charges that Vic has brought is conspiracy. The idea being that something in discovery for Monica and Funi could bring her back in for things she did in concert with the other defendants. She does seem like the type of person who would keep a grudge because you took one of her Oreos.
Click to expand...

I mean, even if they do find evidence in discovery, can they actually file a claim against her for the same action that's already been dismissed by TCPA? I was under the impression it would be dismissed with prejudice.
 
I can't imagine said:
I mean, even if they do find evidence in discovery, can they actually file a claim against her for the same action that's already been dismissed by TCPA? I was under the impression it would be dismissed with prejudice.
Click to expand...

It's with prejudice.
 
"my courage won't fade if you're with me my enemies will never win."

Huh the theme of dragon ball z Kai suddenly became a lot more relevant
 
Don't Tread on Me said:
This is still going on? Have things been delayed because of rona or what?
Click to expand...

Right now they're still waiting to get the case presented to the Texas Court of Appeals, depending on the ruling is probably when things heat back up, there are a few possibilities: The court of appeals reverses some of Chupp's boomerisms, they reverse all of his boomerisms, or they deny Vic's appeal and say Chupp was a good boy and dindu nuffin. There may be more possibilities but I'm well versed in all the legal aspects of it. Things were slowed a bit I think because the virus but that happened to a lot of courts across the country.

In the first two scenarios the case goes back to Chupp but the decisions regarding the defamation are taken out his hands and from there the the case can proceed onward or if the appeals court says Chupp was a good boy then if Vic wants to he could have his legal team appeal to the Texas Supreme Court to hear the case and make a decision.
 
Exterminatus said:
In the first two scenarios the case goes back to Chupp but the decisions regarding the defamation are taken out his hands and from there the the case can proceed onward or if the appeals court says Chupp was a good boy then if Vic wants to he could have his legal team appeal to the Texas Supreme Court to hear the case and make a decision.
Click to expand...

Or quite possibly, they bring back some people on some counts, and those people appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, while Mignogna cross appeals the counts that weren't brought back. Or everyone has suffered enough agony by that point that it settles.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Allanon, Exterminatus, Riku and 2 others
AnOminous said:
Or quite possibly, they bring back some people on some counts, and those people appeal to the Texas Supreme Court, while Mignogna cross appeals the counts that weren't brought back. Or everyone has suffered enough agony by that point that it settles.
Click to expand...
Aren't appeals like 99% of the time rejected though?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: ThatDumbPhilosopher
Superman93 said:
Aren't appeals like 99% of the time rejected though?
Click to expand...
98% actually, for non-trials https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu... filed in 10.9,10.0 percent of nontried cases.

That being said, that figure isn't exactly... accurate? No, that has different connotations....

You see, a lot of people appeal.... when they have nothing to reeeeeally appeal. As in, the majority. An appeal is not a do-over, its a lawyer making a case that the judge or jury (Judge in this case) fucked up something procedurally. But most appeals are garbage, and effectively say "The judge didn't use proper procedure because they didn't rule in my favor".
 
Gehenna said:
An appeal is not a do-over, its a lawyer making a case that the judge or jury (Judge in this case) fucked up something procedurally.
Click to expand...

In this case, it's an appeal of a TCPA dismissal, which is reviewed de novo, i.e. it essentially is a do-over. The appeals court does not need to defer to the factual determinations of the trial court and, for that matter, the trial court didn't make any, or outline any reasoning that they could have deferred to even if they were obligated to. It was the judicial equivalent of "nuh-uh!"

I'd put the odds of this being at least partly reversed at 50% or better. TCPA cases before this court get overturned fairly regularly. It's a newish law and trial courts routinely overuse it.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Pomme Poire Peche, The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, Allanon and 9 others
Gehenna said:
But most appeals are garbage, and effectively say "The judge didn't use proper procedure because they didn't rule in my favor".
Click to expand...
Exhibit A: Romeo Lacoste.
Exhibit B: possibly Akilah Hughes.
Exhibit C: Duncan v. Becerra. (The California federal suit where Becerra, attorney general of CA, appealed the decision that struck down California's 10+ magazine laws; the ruling was upheld by the panel from the 9th Circuit).

AnOminous said:
I'd put the odds of this being at least partly reversed at 50% or better. TCPA cases before this court get overturned fairly regularly. It's a newish law and trial courts routinely overuse it.
Click to expand...
I just hope for all defendants to come back on at least one cause of action, because that's when the motions to compel start to get angrier.
 
Last edited:
  • Optimistic
  • Like
Reactions: Riku, LawTwitter is Dumb, GenericReviewerDraco and 1 other person
OneHandClapping said:
I'm talking malice (as in she clearly dislikes Vic), not actual malice (a legal term).

Unless you want to argue that "I want his head, I want his balls" doesn't show ill will towards another person.
Click to expand...
Yes but the way you said it conflates the two.

It also doesnt help Vic at this stage. It might help get Vic a higher award after actual malice is proven.
 
So, random thunk. Was following the California 10+ magazine ruling, and the plaintiff (CA DOJ) requested an en banc review of the Ninth circuit.

No matter how these appeals go, would a next step for the losing side be an en banc, or is it straight to SCOTX?

DragoonSierra said:
Yes but the way you said it conflates the two.

It also doesnt help Vic at this stage. It might help get Vic a higher award after actual malice is proven.
Click to expand...
I have no idea how you got that meaning from what I wrote.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Riku and 5t3n0g0ph3r
OneHandClapping said:
So, random thunk. Was following the California 10+ magazine ruling, and the plaintiff (CA DOJ) requested an en banc review of the Ninth circuit.

No matter how these appeals go, would a next step for the losing side be an en banc, or is it straight to SCOTX?
Click to expand...

California's procedures might be different than Texas' regarding how cases are brought before their respective Supreme Courts.
Perhaps this might be best answered by our more informed Law Kiwis *cough* @AnOminous @RodgerDodger *cough*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back