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

Spectre_06 said:
Cross-posting from the Rackets Weeb Wars thread.

Last March I teased you guys with something, saying Nick had "made me aware of something" but I didn't give any more than that. It was because Nick said I could tease it here, but not explain what it is as he didn't want Lawtwitter to get wind of anything. At this point I can now inform you all of what it was.

Under the Texas Rules of Appelate Procedure (Rule 11) the clerk of the court "may receive, but not file, an amicus curiae brief." Because of this, literally any swinging dick could file one. Nick, at the time, said he was considering submitting one but he was waiting on that, and I suspected it might be as close to the final day as possible to submit one. I can now confirm that Nick has submitted one.

View attachment 1613554

EDIT: Nick right now to the CoA:

View attachment 1613571
Click to expand...
Oh, is this that thing you kept repeating about how you had 'something' but wouldn't say what until you got enough slaps on the wrist to stop talking about it? I seem to remember something like that happening.

...So what is this, exactly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: not william stenchever and 6thRanger
Spectre_06 said:
I can not. Nick only posted that, and he's probably going to go over it tonight, since tomorrow he has PPP on.
Click to expand...
I guess we'll have to wait... it looks like it isn't available on the court's website, unfortunately; I assume they won't post it unless the court decides to consider it, or something like that.
 
Allanon said:
Oh, is this that thing you kept repeating about how you had 'something' but wouldn't say what until you got enough slaps on the wrist to stop talking about it? I seem to remember something like that happening.

...So what is this, exactly?
Click to expand...
basically it's a document in which Nick can voice his support for Vic and offer his insight and expertise on why he believes Vic should prevail. As has been pointed out though, The COA could choose to ignore it entirely, which is why it's more of a symbolic gesture than anything, as Nick himself has apparently said as well.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: knux, 6thRanger, Riku and 1 other person
Doodler98 said:
basically it's a document in which Nick can voice his support for Vic and offer his insight and expertise on why he believes Vic should prevail. As has been pointed out though, The COA could choose to ignore it entirely, which is why it's more of a symbolic gesture than anything, as Nick himself has apparently said as well.
Click to expand...

So it's nothing more than Nick t-posing on the defense and lawtwitter and giving people something on the 22nd to look forward to on his channel. It'll be amusing if his document ultimately is considered and actually helps Vic, though.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: not william stenchever, GenericReviewerDraco, 6thRanger and 4 others
Allanon said:
So it's nothing more than Nick t-posing on the defense and lawtwitter and giving people something on the 22nd to look forward to on his channel. It'll be amusing if his document ultimately is considered and actually helps Vic, though.
Click to expand...

It's not likely to be considered because of when he's filing it (and Nick admitted it was a longshot even if he had filed it before today/tomorrow) but I agree, I would have preferred him to file it before the panel convense. Nick tells us you want to give the judges all the reasons to say 'yes' to what you do, and it seems like he just ignored that shit for his own filing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harvey Danger
quickthrowaway said:
So that's what this was about.

1600788513581.png


The absolute state of Nick doing legal work for free.
Click to expand...

Now comes Nicholas Robert Rekieta, from the Ty Beard school of waiting until the last minute, pulling an all nighter to write an amicus brief too late to even be considered.
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Apteryx Owenii, Struggler, not william stenchever and 22 others
Spectre_06 said:
It's not likely to be considered because of when he's filing it (and Nick admitted it was a longshot even if he had filed it before today/tomorrow) but I agree, I would have preferred him to file it before the panel convense. Nick tells us you want to give the judges all the reasons to say 'yes' to what you do, and it seems like he just ignored that shit for his own filing.
Click to expand...

The reasoning is obvious: even if it's considered it probably won't matter - the appeal is fine as is - and if he'd done it earlier, lawtwitter would just have spammed up the court with their own in response, slowing down the court more and then done stupid victory laps about how 100+ "lawyers" all sent in amicus curiae in favor of the defense, proving both that Vic is BTFO and wrong forever and that he has no friends or supporters while Ron et al has the whole of the internet united behind him and his victim eternal fiancee.

Seems like it's a better argument to say he shouldn't have bothered at all, but I guess it's a spite filing + something to discuss/teach on his show.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: ConSluttant, Exterminatus, GenericReviewerDraco and 7 others
Doodler98 said:
basically it's a document in which Nick can voice his support for Vic and offer his insight and expertise on why he believes Vic should prevail. As has been pointed out though, The COA could choose to ignore it entirely, which is why it's more of a symbolic gesture than anything, as Nick himself has apparently said as well.
Click to expand...
I'd assume that he'd partly want to address the stuff from MoRon about how he's supposedly Vic's lawyer/agent.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 6thRanger
  • Like
Reactions: ConSluttant, Slimy Time, ThatDumbPhilosopher and 7 others
quickthrowaway said:
This is why he is king grifter, he's a showman to the end.
Click to expand...

Tbh I am not exactly a fan of amicus briefs from anyone who isn't particularly well qualified to give one, either by way of academic qualification in the issue presented, being an organization specializing in that issue, or some extreme level of qualification like having the treatise on the subject named after you, like the Nimmer of Nimmer on Copyright who is particularly well qualified by way of being dead. They are usually attention seeking gestures that do little to help the court.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: not william stenchever, 1Tonka_Truck, Slimy Time and 7 others
AnOminous said:
Tbh I am not exactly a fan of amicus briefs from anyone who isn't particularly well qualified to give one, either by way of academic qualification in the issue presented, being an organization specializing in that issue, or some extreme level of qualification like having the treatise on the subject named after you, like the Nimmer of Nimmer on Copyright who is particularly well qualified by way of being dead. They are usually attention seeking gestures that do little to help the court.
Click to expand...

I would not be surprised if the amicus contains information as a witness to how Chupp ran the proceeding, though I have no actual evidence to support this feeling as I haven't seen the filing at all. Likely it would be stuff that could be better found in an affidavit but, considering the appeals court won't consider something like that this might be the best way to do it.
 
Spectre_06 said:
I would not be surprised if the amicus contains information as a witness to how Chupp ran the proceeding, though I have no actual evidence to support this feeling as I haven't seen the filing at all.
Click to expand...

That would be improper as it would actually be evidence. In general, though, unless it is something astounding, I don't like that it opens the door for post-submission motions such as an opposition to considering it, especially as it is already unlikely to be considered in any helpful way. I just don't see the upside, at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Captain Manning, Slimy Time, StandardStaples and 4 others
The only "upside" I can see for such an act, beside the obvious fact that is done to support Vic and show actually how much Nick really cares about the case, is the much funnier REEEEEEEEEEing is gonna cause to the "80+ lawyers on our side and 1000+ victims of Vic along the whole industry which is apparently all KV" that with everything they've said and time wasted for almost 2 years, have done nothing of the sort. Besides, the salt&grift is reaching universal level-tier with only that act I'm sure it won't be considered given the time of filing, but at least it's something not one of those larpers have done. Wonder why? :smug: :smug:
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ConSluttant, GenericReviewerDraco and The Demon Pimp of Razgriz
You know, it just occurred to me that 99.5% of the sperging about Nick's amicus that's going to occur would occur regardless of whether or not he's actually filed it. What if, hypothetically, he wrote it, leaked the suggestion that he filed it, but didn't actually file it?

I do believe he filed it, but we don't have proof...
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: 774, not william stenchever, Slimy Time and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back