2017-12-14 - Scott v. Moon Mk III

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
yfw the judge tells you don't get any of @Null 's shekels

nsWoMXX.png
 
what amuses me is that it's "trial with witnesses" ... so did she go to court with her husband, summon him as witness, plead to the judge to have my kiwizone taken down and them given eleventy million dollars, and then the judge just ruled in favor of the empty defense podium?

Tbh I'd do the same thing out of sheer spite. I can't even imagine how indignifying it must be to go through everything you go through to be where you are as a sitting judge and then get handed a retarded frivolous case like this just because some neurotic spaz couldn't handle being talked about on the internet.
 
Are her lawsuits all being thrown out bc she just vomits word salad onto a form instead of hiring a real lawyer?
two big issues

1) failing to make a claim [i.e. you have to have a 'tort', or legal reason, to sue someone]
2) subject matter jurisdiction [you cant sue a floridian under virginia law]

these are the two most fundamental building blocks in any case.
 
1) failing to make a claim [i.e. you have to have a 'tort', or legal reason, to sue someone]
2) subject matter jurisdiction [you cant sue a floridian under virginia law]

these are the two most fundamental building blocks in any case.
You'd think someone who "owns her own business" and filled a case for a stalker might have a mild familiarity with these basic rules... or the capacity to use google.

Could you imagine the judge, some 40-50 something year old professional person, having this brought before them and then coming here out of curiosity... It somewhat reminds me of the predicament H3H3 got himself into where the judge had to watch not only H3's video but also Matt's, multiple times.

I'd be embarrassed to present this in a court of law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back