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

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

In some ways it could make it funnier, because Nick isn't involved in the case in any significant way, from what I can gather, even less so than an affidavee...but the twits on lawtwitter won't think that.

At least Vic actually knows Nick so he's inherently more relevant to the case than people like the perjury guy.

 

[DragoonSierra]

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.

I think the one useful thing this might do is set the record straight about Nicks role in the case. With all the bitching about Nick in the filings from the other side it makes sense for him to clarify what role he played in the case.

 

[Laundui_or_douchette?]

This is an interesting thing for Nick to do. He is referenced multiple times in the filings by the defendants, but not by the plaintiff.
They noticed to depose him, and the Gofundme is referenced multiple times.

If they look at it, it might round out some questions they have.

 

[Crazedking]

TIL, non-party can give their opinion on a case directly to the court. Thats seems weird to me. TBH feels like something Nick shouldnt have done. If it most likely has no benefit for Vic, then its just attention whoring for his show. Not exactly a fan of this move.

 

[I can't imagine]

This is an interesting thing for Nick to do. He is referenced multiple times in the filings by the defendants, but not by the plaintiff.
They noticed to depose him, and the Gofundme is referenced multiple times.

If they look at it, it might round out some questions they have.

I'm not sure if he could address that stuff in an amicus brief. It's not an affidavit; he can't provide new evidence, even in rebuttal to claims made by the defendants.

 

[Fox Fucker]

Part of me wonders if filing it might come back to bite him. Because if he indeed filed it then that means he's not involved in the case at least tangentially, right? Would that give the defense new reasoning to depose him (with the requisite fighting he'll no doubt be doing to combat it)?

 

[Nontransferable]

TIL, non-party can give their opinion on a case directly to the court. Thats seems weird to me. TBH feels like something Nick shouldnt have done. If it most likely has no benefit for Vic, then its just attention whoring for his show. Not exactly a fan of this move.

If someone from Law Twitter had written an amicus brief, people would've said that they were just jerking themselves off.

I don't see the upside either. If it's better than what Vic's quarter-million dollar legal team put on paper, that's embarrassing. If it's worse, that's embarrassing for the drunk who thought he could outdo everyone by pulling an all nighter the day before the due date.

 

[Captain Manning]

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.

I was always taught that an amicus brief is legitimate if you are a party that has a collateral interest in the case law that can be generated by an appeal decision.

Case in point, I once worked for a social service agency that filed one in support of another social service agency that had a jury award against them. They were spooked by the size of the jury award and the fact they'd actually have to be more careful to avoid making the same negligent mistake.

I don't know what Nick's case law interest is. I don't think asking the court to reverse and remand the case to Chupp so that Nick can continue covering this for another year, and avoid having to talk about Ethan Ralph's demon baby, is exactly what they had in mind with amicus briefs.

Once again, I'll just tell everybody here to hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

 

[Allanon]

Part of me wonders if filing it might come back to bite him. Because if he indeed filed it then that means he's not involved in the case at least tangentially, right? Would that give the defense new reasoning to depose him (with the requisite fighting he'll no doubt be doing to combat it)?

He wants them to try, though. They'll fail, or if they don't fail he'll still burn up huge amounts of their money for them to succeed, only so he can then livestream the deposition and give them zero information, because he has no information for them.

 

[quickthrowaway]

If someone from Law Twitter had written an amicus brief, people would've said that they were just jerking themselves off.

They would be cause none of them are practicing lawyers.

I already see enough backlash from people just on here and the document isn't even available to read. I have yet to see anyone even praise it on the merits so how about all you nerds calm down.

Now I really want him to have not even submitted it.

Part of me wonders if filing it might come back to bite him. Because if he indeed filed it then that means he's not involved in the case at least tangentially, right? Would that give the defense new reasoning to depose him (with the requisite fighting he'll no doubt be doing to combat it)?

Them finding an excuse to depose Nick is just gonna cost more money to the defendants. He better give it to them on the premise of being allowed to livestream it with super chats.

 

[Allanon]

They would be cause none of them are practicing lawyers.

I already see enough backlash from people just on here and the document isn't even available to read. I have yet to see anyone even praise it on the merits so how about all you nerds calm down.

Now I really want him to have not even submitted it.


Them finding an excuse to depose Nick is just gonna cost more money to the defendants. He better give it to them on the premise of being allowed to livestream it with super chats.

I see it as a meaningless t-pose that gives him something to stream about tonight for all the people who didn't pay attention and thought tonight was going to have some special appeal moment + it's a teaching moment to explain what the amicus brief is. And it lets him be smug at law twitter.

In short, he's basically jerking himself off, but unlike law twitter he's going to get paid to do it. It's ultimately inconsequential, good or bad, but it's something new to point and laugh at lawtwitter about, at least.

 

[The Singer Of Songs]

Assholes, all of them. How the fuck do you not do this? Over a quarter million in crowdfunding isn't enough for some goddamn copies? They're just that goddamn cheap? How. Fucking. Embarrassing. Yet again more amateur hour shit.

You were saying?

 

[KittyLoaf]

Assholes, all of them. How the fuck do you not do this? Over a quarter million in crowdfunding isn't enough for some goddamn copies? They're just that goddamn cheap? How. Fucking. Embarrassing. Yet again more amateur hour shit.

Looks like Vic's team did submit courtesy briefs.

Edit: sniped.
Edit 2: if I remember correctly, not everything has been showing up for the COA arc ... I'm betting it's safe to assume that all parties submitted courtesy briefs.

 

[AnOminous]

Looks like Vic's team did submit courtesy briefs.

View attachment 1615049

Edit: sniped.
Edit 2: if I remember correctly, not everything has been showing up for the COA arc ... I'm betting it's safe to assume that all parties submitted courtesy briefs.

Good. I'm very glad to be wrong. It's a minor thing but good to have done the right thing on.

I can blame the court then. They actually noted Funimation's submissions but not BHBH's. Why? I don't know. Earlier in the year research and the Second District site itself went months between any kind of update then updated them all at once.

I was always taught that an amicus brief is legitimate if you are a party that has a collateral interest in the case law that can be generated by an appeal decision.

Another good reason is that you're an academic or practitioner (or both) with special expertise in the issue the court is addressing. For example, this amicus brief submitted by Eugene Volokh in a case involving Yelp. Generally such a brief describes the interest of the amicus or amici. In this brief, it is:

An amicus brief can support the arguments of one party or the other, or be entirely neutral and support neither party. In general, an amicus is not supposed to be a person with a direct interest in the outcome of the specific case. Nick doesn't have such a direct interest, but he is hardly the sort of disinterested party trying to help the court with a thorny issue of law. He is clearly, for his own reasons, an advocate of one side, and has at least an indirect interest in the outcome of the specific case.

So long as he keeps it to the specific legal issue or issues it's about, I don't see how it can cause much harm. I'm jut not a huge fan of amicus briefs in general and don't think any but the very best of them are actually helpful to the court.

 

[Kosher Salt]

Looks like Vic's team did submit courtesy briefs.

Good. I'm very glad to be wrong. It's a minor thing but good to have done the right thing on.

I can blame the court then. They actually noted Funimation's submissions but not BHBH's. Why? I don't know. Earlier in the year research and the Second District site itself went months between any kind of update then updated them all at once.

The court does have a docket entry that says that some copies were submitted on 9/10, but there was no accompanying letter or anything to indicate who filed them or what they were.

edit: here's Nick's draft of the amicus that he intends to file (it hasn't been finished yet, much less filed).

Spoiler

(the conclusion & prayer section isn't finished)

 

[Captain Manning]

An amicus brief can support the arguments of one party or the other, or be entirely neutral and support neither party. In general, an amicus is not supposed to be a person with a direct interest in the outcome of the specific case. Nick doesn't have such a direct interest, but he is hardly the sort of disinterested party trying to help the court with a thorny issue of law. He is clearly, for his own reasons, an advocate of one side, and has at least an indirect interest in the outcome of the specific case.

So long as he keeps it to the specific legal issue or issues it's about, I don't see how it can cause much harm. I'm jut not a huge fan of amicus briefs in general and don't think any but the very best of them are actually helpful to the court.

My point is that an indirect interest is not necessarily a collateral case law interest. I can't see Nick's collateral case law interest, and thus I don't think his brief could be enlightening from that angle. Nor can I see the other reasons for filing one you mentioned applying here either.

Can't hurt to throw it on the clerk's desk, but don't see how it really helps any.

SAPPY (but important) SPEECH
---

Today, we've crossed the rubicon. It is in the hands of appeals judges. What happens, happens. I created this thread more than a year ago (before handing it over to @5t3n0g0ph3r for health reasons). I rarely check in on it now. I want to emphasize something very important that everybody should keep in mind.

I want to remind everybody (again) that the real victory was the cows uncovered along the way. The crazy people on the Internet we got to laugh at. That is ultimately the point of the Farms. To document. To laugh. It has far less to do with advocacy for one position over the other. Even people on this site who hate WW got some amusement value out of all this.

Always remember that. Even if the worst outcome materializes (the panel affirms everything), the judicial system can never take that away. A loss for Vic would not be a defeat for the Farms. The Farms already won. As long as there are crazy people on the Internet, the Farms will always win.

It's been a hell of a ride. Luck be to Vic, and God bless you all.

 

[Kosher Salt]

My point is that an indirect interest is not necessarily a collateral case law interest. I can't see Nick's collateral case law interest, and thus I don't think his brief could be enlightening from that angle. Nor can I see the other reasons for filing one you mentioned applying here either.

I was editing it into my last post while you were posting this, but basically it's that he owns a Texas LLC and is "concerned about how online statements might impact its own reputation and business operations withing (sic) the state" if "defamation and related torts may be effectively nullified in the state of Texas."

Let's hope Nick fixes that typo. (There was a typo or two that he fixed during the stream, that the fix may or may not have ended up in my screenshots, but I don't think he fixed that one.)

 

[Captain Manning]

I was editing it into my last post while you were posting this, but basically it's that he owns a Texas LLC and is "concerned about how online statements might impact its own reputation and business operations withing (sic) the state" if "defamation and related torts may be effectively nullified in the state of Texas."

Seems kinda weak, but okay. Like I said, I don't think it'll hurt, but I can't see it helping much, either.

Just keep my speech in mind over the next couple of weeks/months. That is the single most important thing, at this juncture, and as far as I'm concerned. Last time (before the decision at the trial court level) people didn't heed those words, and there ended up being a lot of upset people.

 

[Kosher Salt]

Frankly I like Nick but I still think it's pretty masturbatory. It'd have been way funnier if the plan was not to actually file it, just to make LawTwit go into a tizzy and try to waste MoRon's time and money responding to a non-existent document.

 

[TheClappening]

My point is that an indirect interest is not necessarily a collateral case law interest. I can't see Nick's collateral case law interest, and thus I don't think his brief could be enlightening from that angle. Nor can I see the other reasons for filing one you mentioned applying here either.

Can't hurt to throw it on the clerk's desk, but don't see how it really helps any.

SAPPY (but important) SPEECH
---

Today, we've crossed the rubicon. It is in the hands of appeals judges. What happens, happens. I created this thread more than a year ago (before handing it over to @5t3n0g0ph3r for health reasons). I rarely check in on it now. I want to emphasize something very important that everybody should keep in mind.

I want to remind everybody (again) that the real victory was the cows uncovered along the way. The crazy people on the Internet we got to laugh at. That is ultimately the point of the Farms. To document. To laugh. It has far less to do with advocacy for one position over the other. Even people on this site who hate WW got some amusement value out of all this.

Always remember that. Even if the worst outcome materializes (the panel affirms everything), the judicial system can never take that away. A loss for Vic would not be a defeat for the Farms. The Farms already won. As long as there are crazy people on the Internet, the Farms will always win.

It's been a hell of a ride. Luck be to Vic, and God bless you all.

Technically the court 17-0ing Vic would be the second worst outcome. Worst outcome is the court 17-0ing him and then overturning Chupp's fees ruling and ordering Vic to pay ~$300k to MoRon.

In any case, I hope you live to see Vic win money to start his own anime compant, Funimation dissolved, Jamie Marchi drink herself into a coma because of TDS and feminism, Monica beating Ron to death with a remote because he couldn't keep his mouth shut, and Monica thrown into prison where she can Moni-cut the other inmates. Whereupon you can peacefully pass away from complications arising from ebola, WuFlu, and acute autism.

If the court results are little more realistic, you have to stay alive.