Skitzocow David Anthony Stebbins / Acerthorn / stebbinsd / fayettevillesdavid - Litigious autist, obese livestreamer, elder abuser, violent schizo, ladyboy importer, hot dog enjoyer, wereturkey.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

How much will David sue the farms for?

  • $0/no suit

    Votes: 118 5.3%

  • Hundreds

    Votes: 17 0.8%

  • Thousands

    Votes: 45 2.0%

  • Millions

    Votes: 184 8.2%

  • Billions

    Votes: 136 6.1%

  • Trillions

    Votes: 483 21.6%

  • A steamy night with Null in a lace negligee

    Votes: 1,257 56.1%
  • Total voters
    2,240
Hmmm? I notice that the in the Ninth Circuit they do at times allow cameras or recording of the proceedings. I’m trying to figure out if that is just Appellate or if it applies to the Circuit Courts? Because it would be utterly hilarious if some of Acerthorne’s victims or other parties requested to livestream the proceedings.

Am I alone in thinking that if the Judge scheduled a hearing for Acer’s oh so wonderfully framed motions to reconsider and recuse, it’s most likely because he or she wants to open a can of whupass on the Pro Se Tard?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kookoobra, REGENDarySumanai and yydszmiteg1
RodgerDodger said:
Am I alone in thinking that if the Judge scheduled a hearing
Click to expand...
It is the clerks job to schedule it to the date that would best fit the judge unless the judge later decides the hearing isn't needed. I think this is just the clerk doing his job, not any sign on the judge's part
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Broken Cuddles, RodgerDodger, AnOminous and 6 others
RodgerDodger said:
I’m trying to figure out if that is just Appellate or if it applies to the Circuit Courts? Because it would be utterly hilarious if some of Acerthorne’s victims or other parties requested to livestream the proceedings.
Click to expand...
I think it's pretty unlikely they devote any time to a hearing that could not possibly make the resolution of any argument in the case more obvious. If so, it would be funny, but the Ninth Circuit is one of the more unwieldy and overworked Circuits. It's pretty likely one judge is going to write (or cut and paste) the obvious and the others will sign off on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: REGENDarySumanai, yydszmiteg1, Acertard and 1 other person
Stebbins v. Polano:
For some weird reason Acerthorn replied to his own motion
Screenshot 2022-07-27 214721.png
Stebbins v. Rebolo et al:
Ditto
Screenshot 2022-07-27 214917.png
 

Attachments

  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: REGENDarySumanai, Woobidy Boopity, downloads and 5 others
  • Like
Reactions: REGENDarySumanai, KolKinhs and yydszmiteg1
 
  • Informative
Reactions: REGENDarySumanai, Pee Cola, Acertard and 2 others
  • Like
Reactions: ConSluttant, REGENDarySumanai and Acertard
kcbbq said:
I can't figure out what he's trying to do here. Why is he expecting the intervenors to respond to his insanity after the cases had been dismissed with prejudice?
Click to expand...
It's a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. It would be a complete waste of time and money for any party to file a response, even just stating that the parties oppose the motion.

The Judge may grant the motion for leave and then deny the motion for reconsideration, or he could deny the motion for leave on the grounds that it would be futile, as there is no way for Acerthorn to salvage his case. The judge has a lot of discretion in this case.
 
TurboNAS said:
He’s got a gift for looking up a million legal references
Click to expand...
They aren't very good references, and he uses Google Scholar to find them. See:
aexample.PNG
New document:
Stebbins v. Polano:
MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Brief, and Incorporated Supplemental Brief, in Support of Dkt. 159 (Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration) and Dkt. 160 (Motion to Set Aside Judgment) filed by David A. Stebbins. (Stebbins, David) (Filed on 7/27/2022) (Entered: 07/27/2022)
07.27.PNG

1651.png
1652.png
1653.png
1654.png
1655.png
 

Attachments

  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: REGENDarySumanai, KolKinhs, Star Platinum and 3 others
TurboNAS said:
He’s got a gift for looking up a million legal references for his lolsuits but can’t use the same skills to figure out his video games or YouTube settings?
Click to expand...
Now if only he could actually understand these legal references, lmao.
This is what happens when you don't also diagnose mental retardation out of fear of offending an autist.
They often get bought into these delusions that their mental fixations will give them special abilities, while in reality embodying the Dunning Kruger effect to its maximum.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Vinluv Handesbukia, REGENDarySumanai, KolKinhs and 1 other person
Useful_Mistake said:
They aren't very good references, and he uses Google Scholar to find them. See:
View attachment 3539110
New document:
Stebbins v. Polano:
MOTION for Leave to File Supplemental Brief, and Incorporated Supplemental Brief, in Support of Dkt. 159 (Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration) and Dkt. 160 (Motion to Set Aside Judgment) filed by David A. Stebbins. (Stebbins, David) (Filed on 7/27/2022) (Entered: 07/27/2022)
View attachment 3539111

View attachment 3539120
View attachment 3539122
View attachment 3539123
View attachment 3539124
View attachment 3539127
Click to expand...
This is a remarkably well structured and well presented motion to have the Plaintiff declared a Vexatious Litigant and be subject to sanctions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Karen, ConSluttant, Lurk Moar Fag and 6 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back