- Joined
- Jun 9, 2018
2020-12-07 - Scott v. Moon Mk VI(?)
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Status
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2017
New documents dropped. One, Melinda's crazy reply...
And two, her motion for the judge to recuse himself over GENDER BIAS. Lol!!!
And two, her motion for the judge to recuse himself over GENDER BIAS. Lol!!!
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2018
First fucking sentence and she has me laughing. Holy shit, this is some good stuff.
Guys, I am struggling to read this, I find it too funny...this is in a court archive.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2019
I read through the word salad. Tries way too hard to copy lawyerese, fails miserably.
Also, according to Madame Batshit, Null went to the EU just to be a "fugitive from service". As if the crazy babblings is what drove him to another continent.
I am excited to see what Atty Hardin has in reply.
UglyGremlin69
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 6, 2020
Perhaps I am missing something in this crone's insane rambling; yet I can't find anything in her motion to recuse that makes a vaild claim of 'gender bias.'
I mean, it is clear she is just assmad about not getting a result in her favor. This just seems excidingly stupid on her part. She's only going to anger the poor judge who I am sure is already tired of her bullshit.
I mean, it is clear she is just assmad about not getting a result in her favor. This just seems excidingly stupid on her part. She's only going to anger the poor judge who I am sure is already tired of her bullshit.
DumbDude42
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2019
you'll be disappointed to find that most other countries also have systems in place that allow destitute poorfags to essentially go to court for free
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
Her argument is pretty much "Null is winning and is male, therefore judge hate woman"
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2015
After months of this, Smelly still doesn't know the difference between the Fourth Circuit (a thing that exists) and the Fourth District (a thing that does not).
And a motion to recuse a judge because you're ass-mad about a ruling is a classic lolsuit move.
And a motion to recuse a judge because you're ass-mad about a ruling is a classic lolsuit move.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2020
Other countries have the English rule (loser pays), which means frivolous lawsuits are easier to handle.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2014
"The Judge clearly doesn't buy my case. How should I convince him? Oh, I know! I'll accuse him of illegal discrimination. That'll work."
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
That applies to USA too. Although that mostly applies to federal courts.
"Although the "American Rule" prohibits the shifting of attorney's fees in most cases, an exception allows federal courts to exercise their inherent power to assess such fees as a sanction when a party has acted in bad faith, vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons, when the party practices a fraud upon the court, or delays or disrupts the litigation or hampers a court order's enforcement", "Although a court ordinarily should rely on such rules when there is bad-faith conduct in the course of litigation that could be adequately sanctioned under the rules, the court may safely rely on its inherent power if, in its informed discretion, neither the statutes nor the rules are up to the task. The District Court did not abuse its discretion in resorting to the inherent power in the circumstances of this case."
-Chambers v. Nasco, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 (1991)
"Certain implied powers must necessarily result to our courts of justice, from the nature of their institution. . . . To fine for contempt, imprison for contumacy, enforce the observance of order, &c., are powers which cannot be dispensed with in a court, because they are necessary to the exercise of all others: and so far our courts, no doubt, possess powers not immediately derived from statute"
-United States v. Hudson & Goodwin, 11 U.S. (7 Cr.) 32, 34 (1812)
See also GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. v. HAEGER ET AL.
-Chambers v. Nasco, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 (1991)
"Certain implied powers must necessarily result to our courts of justice, from the nature of their institution. . . . To fine for contempt, imprison for contumacy, enforce the observance of order, &c., are powers which cannot be dispensed with in a court, because they are necessary to the exercise of all others: and so far our courts, no doubt, possess powers not immediately derived from statute"
-United States v. Hudson & Goodwin, 11 U.S. (7 Cr.) 32, 34 (1812)
See also GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. v. HAEGER ET AL.
Not the first time she has done it, and not the last, I think.
DumbDude42
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2019
this doesn't change anything if the loser is broke. in nulls case, the judge could rule that melinda has to pay nulls attorneys fees in full, but then what? how is null gonna collect this judgment when melinda is destitute and penniless? he'd sit on this worthless judgment forever and never get a cent.
same would apply if the court ordered her to pay the court's expenses - now it'd be the state who ends up with a worthless judgment against melinda. can't collect any money where there's no money to collect, and debtor's prison isn't a thing anymore, so that's the end of it.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2019
He can get liens on her property or sell to a collection company. She does own things with value. It's not a perfect remedy but it causes great inconvenience in the lives of even the dole bludgers.
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2020
No, it's not just you.
Apparently he's a misogynist because something something Null's business address? Basically a condensed version of her response. I couldn't read the rest coz I was laughing too hard.
What a fucking spakker. Can't wait for Null's response, it's just shit that it costs him a silly amount of money to figuratively smack her about. Hopefully that money drain will be over sooner rather than later now she's attacking the judge.
GG you crazy bint.
DumbDude42
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2019
like what? earlier in this thread it was mentioned that she is getting evicted from her home, so i assumed that she doesn't own anything of significant worth.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2020
Lighting money that should've gone to your debtors on fire is a criminal offense though. He'd have been able to collect on her stimulus checks, as well as whatever other welfare she gets.
Her account can be garnished, etc. Government's problem.
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2017
Don't entertain the thought of fees being awarded too much. While I would love that particular bill to be shoved up Melinda's backside, it's unlikely to happen.
MelloYello
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2019
Most potential candidates for frivolous lawsuits against Lolcow LLC are american idiots, though.
Melinda, for instance, has barely enough braincells to file this stuff in her own state. I don't see her successfully filing anything in a place she wouldn't be able to find on a map.
- Joined
- May 4, 2020
She got evicted, yes. She (by her own admition) does not have a house and lives in a hotel. Her only property seems to be a car or two.
So, maybe Null could get a couple of grand if he got her cars.
It's up to the winner to collect the reward.
That implies that she has money to burn when judgment is awarded.
Hard to get money from something the people did not receive.
I doubt you can get any value of getting food stamps as payment.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2018
Chant it with me. Vex-at-ious! Li-tig-ant! Vex-at-ious! Li-tig-ant!
Come on judge, do it.
- Status